.-  •o^'^f^/ 


SIIvVKR 


IN    THE 


^IFTY-FIRST  CONGRESS, 


PiwM  liy  a  Soimary  of  tie  Coinage  Laws  of  k  MU  States, 


PRIOR  TO  1873, 


And  a  History  of  the  Act  of  1873  and  the 
Act  of  1878. 


ISSUED   BY   THE 

?JATIONAL.  EXECUTIVE  SILVER  COMMITTEE, 
-^  1890. 


— 6~67^'@'"^r$5 — 


Washington,  D.  C: 

Geo.  K.  Gray,  Peinteb. 

1890. 


LTIONAL  SILVER  COMMITTEE. 


ZO  IRWIN. 

CHEYNEY. 

?  G.  FLETCHER. 

lES  McCADDEN. 

.  HATHAWAY. 

)SEPH  SHELDON. 

jiMBiA— LEE  CRANDALL. 

HAMMOND. 

LVANAGH. 

E.  PHELPS. 

:AS  H.  NELSON. 

3LLER. 

FORTESCUE. 

)ER  POIGNARD. 

5.  FRIERSON. 

IE  W.  LADD. 

VER  N.  BRYAN. 

-E.  M.  BOYNTON. 


Minnesota— JAMES  McARTHUR. 
MissouEi-JOHN  DONIPHAN. 
Montana— CHAS.  F.  MUSSIGEROAD. 
Nebraska— ALLEN  ROOT. 
Nevada-FRANCIS  G.  NEWLANDS. 
New  Jersey— WM.  BRINDLE. 
New  Mexico— SAMUEL  D.  BALDWIN.. 
New  York- JOHN  THOMPSON. 
North  Carolina— ALFRED  M.  SCALES 
Ohio— A.  J.  WARNER. 
Pennsylvania— JOHN  A.  GRIER. 
South  Carolina-JOHN  E.  BRADLEY. 
Tennessee— ANDREW  J.  KELLAR. 
Texas— CHARLES  LONGUEMARE. 
TTtah— WM.  F.  JAMES. 
ViEGiNiA-JOHN  L.  COCHRAN. 
Washington— THOMAS  FITCH. 
Wyoming— M.  N.  GRANT. 


JAMIN  COLVIN. 

lAiRMAN,  A.  J.  WARNER.  Marietta,  Ohio. 
:ce-Chaikman,  THOMAS  FITCH,  Seattle,  Washington. 
SCRET'ARY,  LEE  CRANDALL,  Washington,  D.  C. 


// 


NATIONAL 

EXECUTIVE  SILVER  COMMITTEE. 


EDWARDS  PIERREPONT,  New  York. 

FRANCIS  G.  NEWLANDS,  Nevada. 
L.  M.  RUMSEY,  Missouri. 

FRANK  M.  PIXLEY,  California. 

JOHN  L.  COCHRAN,  Virginia. 

H.  B.  CHAMBERLAIN,  Colorado. 

THOMAS  H.  NELSON,  Indiana. 

A.  J.  WARNER,  Chairman. 

FRANCIS  G.  NEWLANDS,  Vice  Chairman. 

GEORGE  B.  WILLIAMS,  Treasurer. 

LEE  CRANDALL,  Secretary. 


OTTF-ICE : 
1Q09  PENNSYLVANIA  AVENUE 

WASHINGTON,  D.   C. 


rage. 

Chaptek        I.— The  Act  of  1792.— The  First  Coinage  Law       -----  5 

Chaptee       II.— Coinage  Laws  from  1792  to  1873       -------  8 

Dhaptke     III.— The  Act  of  1873 .       -        -  16 

Chaptee      IV.— The  Bland-Allison  Act  of  1878  --------  43 

OHArTEB        v.— Period  from  1878  to  1890      -        -        - 52 

Chapter      VI.— Silver  in  the  Fifty -first  Congress     -------  65 

Chaptee    VII.— The  Caiicus  Bill  Considered  ui  the  House 72 

Chaptee  VIII.— The  House  Caucus  Bill  in  the  Senate 89 

Celaptee      IX.— The  Senate  Free  Coinage  Bill  in  the  House                   -        -       -  114 

Chaptee       X. — ^The  Conference  Committee       - 144 

Chaptee      XL— The  Effect  of  the  Law         -*--.-----  156 

Appendix    ..-- -..-.-.159 


SILVER  IN  THE  FIFTY-FIRST  CONGRESS, 

Including  a  Summary  of  the  Coinage  Laws  of  the  United  States  prior  to  iSyjf 
with  a  History  of  the  Act  of  iSyj  and  the  Act  of  18^8. 


CHAPTER  I. 


Thb  Act  op  1792. — The  First  Coinage  Law. 

The  first  act  of  the  Congress  of  the  United  States  respecting  coiJi- 
agewas  the  act  of  April  2, 1792,  entitled  ^^  An  act  establishing  a  Mint 
and  regulating  the  coin^  of  the  United  States. ' ' 

The  ninth  section  of  this  act  provided — 

"That  there  shall  be  from  time  to  time  struck  and  coined  at  the 
said  Mint,  coins  of  gold,  silver,  and  copper  of  the  following  denomi- 
nations, values  and  descriptions,  viz:  Eagles — each  to  be  of  the 
value  of  ten  Dollars  or  Units,  and  to  contain  two  hundred  and  forty- 
seven  grains  and  four-eighths  of  a  grain  of  pure,  or  two  hundred  and 
seventy  grains  of  standard  gold." 

Then,  after  providing  for  half  eagles,  each  to  be  of  half  the  value  of 
the  eagle,  and  quarter  eagles,  eacli  to  be  of  one-fourth  of  the  value 
of  the  eagle,  the  section  continues,  as  follows: 

''Dollars  or  Units — each  to  be  of  the  value  of  a  Spanish  milled  dol- 
lar as  the  same  is  now  current,  and  to  contain  three  hundred  and  sev- 
enty-one grains  and  four-sixteenth  parts  of  a  grain  of  pure,  or  four 
hundred  and  sixteen  grains  of  standard  silver." 

The  act  also  provided  for  half  dollars,  quarter  dollars,  dimes  and 
half  dimes,  each  to  contain,  respectively,  one-half,  one-fourth,  one- 
tenth  and  one-twentieth  of  the  pure  silver  contained  in  the  dollar. 
The  coinage  of  cents  and  halt  cents  of  copper  were  also  provided  for. 

It  will  thus  be  seen  that  in  this  first  coinage  act  the  words  ' '  dollar  or 
unit "  are  applied  equally  to  dollars  of  gold  and  the  dollar  of  silver — 
that  is,  "dollar"  is  the  name  of  the  unit  of  money  in  our  system,  and 
the  gold  eagle  was  to  be  of  the  value  of  ten  dollars,  or  units.  The 
coin,  however,  which  represented  exactly  the  unit  was  the  silver 
dollar,  and  the  act  provided  that  it  should  be  of  the  value  of  the 
Spanish  milled  dollar,  as  that  piece  was  then  current.  The  assay 
of  a  number  of  Spanish  dollars,  then  in  common  use,  showed  thein 


to   contain  three  hundred  and  seventy-one  and  a  fourth  grains  of 
pure  silver,  or  four  hundred  and  sixteen  grains  of  standard  silver. 

The  proportion  of  pure  gold  to  the  alloy  in  gold  coins  was  made 
by  this  act,  eleven  parts  gold  and  one  part  alloy,  the  alloy  being 
composed  of  silver  and  copper.  The  proportion  of  pure  silver  to  the 
alloy  in  silver  coins  was  made  fourteen -hundred  and  eighty-five  parts 
fine  silver  to  one  hundred  and  seventy-nine  parts  alloy.  The  reason 
for  this  proportion  of  silver  to  alloy  was  that  the  alloy  was  found  in 
that  proportion  in  the  Spanish  dollars  then  current.  These  coins 
having  been  a  long  time  in  circulation  were  more  or  less  worn,  and 
their  assay  did  not  show  the  exact  original  weight  of  the  coin,  and 
probably  not  the  exact  original  proportion  of  alloy.  The  alloy  in 
the  silver  dollar  consisted  of  44|-  grains  of  copper,  making  the  dollar 
892.4  fine  ;  this,  as  will  be  seen  in  another  chapter,  was  afterwards 
changed  to  414- grains  of  copper,  making  the  standard  nine-tenths 
fine. 

Section  11  of  the  act  provided — 

"That  the  proportional  value  of  gold  to  silver  in  all  coins  which 
shall  by  law  be  current  as  money  within  the  United  States,  shall 
be  as  15  to  1,  according  to  quantity  in  weight,  of  pure  gold  or 
pure  silver  ;  that  is  to  say,  every  fifteen  pounds  weight  of  pure  silver 
shall  be  of  equal  value  in  all  payments  with  one  pound  weight  of 
pure  gold,  and  so  in  proportion  as  to  any  greater  or  less  quantities  of 
the  respective  metals." 

A  dollar  of  gold  contained  24.75  grains  of  pure  metal,  and  a 
dollar  of  silver  371.25  grains — being  exactly  15  to  1. 
Section  14  provided — 

''  That  it  shall  be  lawful  for  any  person  or  persons  to  bring  to  the 
said  Mint  gold  and  silver  bullion,  in  order  to  their  being  coined;  and 
that  the  bullion  so  brought  shall  be  there  assayed  and  coined  as 
speedily  as  may  be  after  the  receipt  thereof,  and  that  free  of  expense 
to  the  person  or  persons  by  whom  the  same  shall  have  been  brought. 
And  as  soon  as  the  said  bullion  shall  have  been  coined,  the  person 
or  persons  by  whom  the  same  shall  have  been  delivered,  shall  upon 
dernand,  receive  in  lieu  thereof  coins  of  the  same  species  of  bullion 
which  shall  have  been  so  delivered,  weight  for  weight,  of  the  pure 
gold  or  pure  silver  therein  contained." 

Section  16,  which  follows,  made  the  coinage  of  both  metals  equally 
a  lawful  tender  in  all  payments  whatsoever,'  thus  establishing  the 
free  coinage  and  full  legal  tender  of  both  metals  without '  limit  at 
the  ratio  of  15  to  1.     The  exact  language  of  Section  16,  of  the  act,  is: 

''That  all  tlie  gold  and  silver  coins  which  shall  have  been  struck 


at,  and  issued  from  the  said  Mint,  shall  be  a  lawful  tender  iu  all 
payments  whatsoever;  those  of  full  weight  according  to  the  respec- 
tive values  hereinbefore  declared,  and  those  of  less  than  full  weight 
at  values  proportional  to  their  respective  weights." 

Thus  it  will  be  seen  that  by  this  first  act  of  Congress  establishing 
the  mint,  gold  and  silver,  as  recomraended  by  Hamilton  and  Jefferson, 
and  approved  by  Washington,  were  placed  upon  an  exact  equality  as 
money  metals,  and  their  coinage  made  free  and  unlimited.* 

The  ratio  of  15  to  1  for  American  coins  was  not  exactly  in  accord- 
•ance  with  the  ratio  which  then  prevailed  in  European  countries. 
Silver  was  slightly  over-valued  and  gold  a  little  under-valued.  The 
result  was  that  the  metallic  money  of  the  United  States,  during  this 
period,  consisted  mostly  of  silver  coins  and  largely  of  foreign  coins. 
But  $11,908,890  of  gold  altogether  were  coined  from  1793  to  1834, 
and  this  was  generally  soon  exported.  The  production  of  gold  for 
the  same  period  in  the  United  States  is  given  at  $14,000,000. 

But  it  should  be  remembered  that  this  ratio  of  15  to  1  was  adopted 
eleven  years  before  the  law  of  France,  enacted  in  1803,  fixed  the 
wavering  ratio  at  15|  to  1,  at  which  it  stood  without  variation  except 
as  accounted  for  by  the  course  of  exchange,  till  1873. 

*  Hamilton,  the  first  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  had  recommended  in  his 
celebrated  report  to  Congress  that  tha  unit  of  value  should  rest  on  both  metals, 
and  gave  as  a  reason  that  "  To  annul  the  use  of  either  of  the  metals  as  money  is 
io  abridge  the  quantity  of  circulatinr/  medium,  and  is  liable  to  all  the  objections 
which  arise  from  a  comparison  of  tbe  benefits  of  a  full  with  the  evils  of  a  scanty 
ttireulation."    (Report  to  Congress,  179I.J 

And  Jefferson  in  a  letter  to  Hamilton,  indorsed  this  view,  saying  :  "  I  return 
you  the  report  on  the  mint.  I  concur  with  you  that  the  unit  must  stand  on  both 
metals.'''    (Letter  to  Hamilton,  February,  1792.) 


CHAPTER  II. 


Coinage  Laws  From  1792  to  18V3. 

The  act  of  May  8, 1792,  provided  for  the  purchase  of  copper,  ''not 
exceeding  one  hundred  and  fifty  tons,"  "  to  be  coined  into  cents  and 
half  cents,"  which,  by  the  act  of  April  2,  1V92,  were  to  contain 
respectively  eleven,  and  five  and  a  half,  pennyweights.  The  act  of 
January  14,  1793,  provided  that  the  cent  piece  should  contain  208- 
grains  of  copper  and  the  half  cent  104  grains. 

The  act  of  February  9,  1793,  prescribed  the  rates  at  which  foreign 
gold  and  silver  coins  should  be  legf^l  tender  in  the  United  States. 
This  act  provided  that  Spanish  milled  dollars  should  be  legal  tender 
"at  the  rate  of  100  cents  for  each  dollar,  the  actual  weight  whereof 
shall  not  be  less  than  seventeen  pennyweights  and  seven  grains." 
Section  2  of  this  act  provided,  "That  at  the  expiration  of  three 
years  next  ensuing  the  time  when  the  coinage  of  gold  and  silver, 
agreeably  to  the  act  entitled  '  An  act  establishing  a  mint,  and  regu- 
lating the  coins  of  the  United  States,'  shall  commence  at  the  mint  of 
the  United  States,  (which  time  shall  be  announced  by  the  proclama^ 
tion  of  the  President  of  the  United  States,)  all  foreign  gold  coins  and 
all  foreign  silver  coins,  except  Spanish  milled  dollars,  and  parts  of 
such  dollars,  shall  cease  to  be  a  legal  tender,  as  aforesaid." 

By  this  provision  it  will  be  seen  that,  while  all  other  coins  were  to 
be  deprived  of  legal  tender,  the  Spanish  milled  dollar  was  to  continue 
to  be  a  part  of  the  money  of  the  country. 

Section  5  of  the  act  of  March  3,  1795,  provided  for  the  deduc- 
tion of  two  cents  per  ounce  from  deposits  of  silver  bullion,  when 
below  the  standard  of  the  United  States,  and  four  cents  per  ounce 
from  gold  bullion  below  the  United  States  standard,  to  cover  the 
cost  of  refining. 

Section  7  of  this  act  provided  that  preference  might  be  given  in 
coining  gold  or  silver  bullion,  which  came  up  to  the  United  States 
standard,  over  that  which  required  to  be  refined. 

Section  8  of  the  same  act  authorized  the  President  of  the  United 
States  to  reduce  the  weight  of  the  copper  coin. 

The  act  of  February  1,  1798,  suspended  for  three  years  the  act 
of  February  9,  1793,  and  made  foreign  gold  and  silver  coins  lega 
tender  until  1801. 


Section  2  of  the  act  of  April  24,  1800,  provided — 

"  That  there  shall  be  retained  from  every  deposit,  in  the  mint  of 
gold  or  silver  bullion  below  the  standard  of  the  United  States  such 
sum  as  shall  be  equivalent  to  the  expense  incurred  in  refining  the 
same." 

Thus,  the  only  charge  made  at  the  mint  against  either  gold  or 
silver  bullion  was  the  cost  of  refining  it,  when  below  the  coining 
standard. 

The  act  of  April  10,  1806,  repealed  the  act  of  February  9,  1793,. 
regulating  foreign  coins,  and  provided  that  "foreign  gold  and  silver 
coins  shall  pass  current  as  money  within  the  United  States,  and 
be  a  legal  tender  for  the  payment  of  all  debts  and  demands,"  at 
rates  provided  in  the  act.  Among  the  coins  named  was  the  Spanish 
milled  dollar.  This  act  also  made  it  the  duty  of  the  Secretary  of 
the  Treasury  to  cause  assays  of  foreign  coins  to  be  had  at  the  mint 
of  the  United  States  each  year,  and  to  make  a  report  thereof  to- 
Con  gress. 

The  act  of  April  21, 1806,  provided  penalties  for  falsifying  or  coun- 
terfeiting coins  of  the  United  States,  or  foreign  coins  circulating  in 
the  United  States. 

The  act  of  April  29,  1816,  provided  that  after  three  years  gold 
coins  of  Grreat  Britain,  France,  Portugal  and  Spain,  and  the  crown» 
and  five-franc  silver  pieces  of  France  should  not  be  legal  tender. 
This  act  was,  however,  modified  by  the  act  of  March  3,  1819,  whicl: 
provided  that  from  and  after  the  first  day  of  November  of  that  year- 
foreign  gold  coins  should  cease  to  be  legal  tender  in  the  United 
States.  The  French  crown  and  five-franc  piece,  however,  were 
continued  as  legal  tender  for  two  years,  and  were  afterwards  continued 
legal  tender  till  1823,  and  again  till  1827. 

But  by  the  act  of  March  3,  1823,  all  foreign  gold  coins  were  again 
made  receivable  for  public  lands.  The  act  of  June  25,  1834,  made 
the  dollar  piece  of  Mexico,  Peru,  Chili  and  Central  America  and  the 
five-franc  piece  of  France  legal  tender  at  their  nominal  value  when- 
of  full  weight. 

As  will  appear  from  the  foregoing  summary  of  the  coinage  laws- 
from  1792  to  1834,  the  coinage  of  both  gold  and  silver  for  the  benefit 
of  the  holder  remained  free  and  unrestricted  at  the  ratio  of  15  to  1,. 
as  established  by  the  act  of  1792,  and  that  during  this  period  foreigii 
gold  and  silver  coins,  at  values  designated  by  Congress,  continued  tt> 
be  current  in  the  United  States. 


10 

It  is  worthy  of  note  too  that  at  no  time  was  the  Spanish  milled  dol- 
lar, the  prototype  of  the  American  standard  dollar,  barred  from  circu- 
lation or  deprived  of  its  legal  tender  quality. 

In  1834  the  first  change  in  the  ratio  of  pure  metal  in  the  gold  and 
silver  coins  of  the  United  States  was  made. 

By  the  act  of  June  28,  1834,  the  pure  gold  in  the  gold  eagle 
was  reduced  from  247^  grains  to  232  grains,  and  the  other  gold 
pieces  were  reduced  in  proportion. 

Section  3  of  the  act  changing  the  weight  of  gold  coins  pro- 
vided— 

''That  all  gold  coins  of  the  United  States,  minted  anterior  to  the 
-31st  day  of  July  next  shall  be  receivable  in  all  payments  at  the  rate 
of  ninety-four  and  eight-tenths  of  a  cent  per  pennyweight." 

By  an  act  of  the  same  date  foreign  gold  coins  were  made  current 
in  the  United  States  at  the  same  rate  per  pennyweight  as  provided 
for  United  States  gold  coins,  except  French  gold  coins,  which  being 
nine-tenths  fine  (instead  of  eleven-twelfths  fine,  as  were  our  first  gold 
■and  most  foreign  gold  coins,)  were  made  current  at  the  rate  of  93.1 
cents  a  pennyweight. 

This  act  of  1834  making  the  eagle  contain  232  grains  of  pure  and 
258  grains  of  standard  gold,  changed  the  alloy  to  very  nearly  one- 
tenth  instead  of  eleven-twelfths.  If  the  pure  gold  in  the  eagle 
had  been  made  232.2  grains  instead  of  232  grains,  the  proportion  of 
pure  gold  to  alloy  would  have  been  exactly  as  9  to  1.  The  change 
to  this  proportion  was  made  three  years  later  when  the  French  stand- 
ard of  fineness  was  adopted  for  both  gold  and  silver  coins,  and  from 
:that  date  all  our  gold  and  silver  coins  have  been  nine-tenths  fine. 

The  new  gold  coins  provided  for  by  the  act  of  1834  were  made 
legal  tender  in  all  payments.  The  old  gold  coins,  those  coined  prior 
to  1834,  as  shown  above,  were  made  receivable  in  all  payments  at 
the  rate  of  94.8  cents  per  pennyweight,  and  as  the  eagle  piece  con- 
tained 270  grains  eleven-twelfths  fine,  or  27  grains  of  the  then 
standard  gold  to  the  dollar,  these  coins  were,  by  this  act,  raised  to 
11.066. 

The  ratio  of  pure  gold  to  pure  silver  in  our  coins  was  made  by  the 
act  of  1834,  23.2  to  37 H,  or  almost  exactly  16  to  1.  No  change  was 
made  in  our  silver  coins  by  the  act  of  1834.  Why  the  ratio  should 
have  been  changed  at  this  time  from  15  to  1,  as  established  in  1792, 
to  16  to  1,  thirty-one  years  after  the  French  act  of  1803,  which  had 
practically  fixe<l  the  ratio  for  all  Europe  at  15A  to  1,  is  difficult  to 


11 

understand.  The  reason  usually  given  is  that  under  the  ratio  of  15 
to  1  little  or  no  gold  came  or  stayed  here,  and  new  mines  of  gold 
having  been  discovered  in  North  Carolina  and  Georgia  about  this 
time,  the  higher  ratio  was  adopted  in  order  to  give  the  gold  a 
higher  rating  relatively  to  silver,  and  thereby  keep  it  here. 

In  the  debates  in  the  House,  in  183^1,  there  was  some  opposition  to 
the  adoption  of  the  ratio  of  16  to  1 ,  but  an  amendment  offered  in  the 
House  by  Mr.  Selden  to  make  the  ratio  15.625  to  1,  was  voted  down 
by  127  to  52.  In  the  Senate  there  was  but  little  discussion  on  the 
subject,  and  but  seven  votes  were  cast  against  the  bill.  Mr.  Ewing, 
however,  as  did  Mr.  Gorham,  of  the  House,  expressed  the  opinion  that 
the  act  rated  gold  too  high,  and  that  the  effect  would  be  that  silver 
coins  would  leave  the  country  as  gold  coins  had  before. 

If  the  ratio  fixed  in  the  act  of  1Y92  was  a  mistake,  the  ratio  adopted 
by  the  act  of  1834  was  a  much  greater  mistake,  since,  while  in  1792, 
Europe  had  not  settled  on  a  definite  ratio,  in  1834  the  ratio  of  15^  to  1 
had  been  well  established  for  over  thirty  years.  This  mistake  has 
been  a  grievous  stumbling-block  in  the  way  of  establishing  a  uni- 
form ratio  for  the  different  countries. 

The  discovery  of  gold  in  North  Carolina  and  Georgia  led  to  the 
establishment,  in  1835,  of  three  branch  mints,  one  at  New  Orleans, 
one  at  Charlotte,  N.  C,  and  one  at  Dahlohnega,  Ga.;  but  except  the 
mint  at  New  Orleans  they  were  little  used. 

The  act  of  January  18,  1837,  revised  the  mint  laws  throughout 
and  condensed  the  whole  into  thirty-eight  sections  of  a  new  act,  which 
is  known  as  the  mint  act  of  1837. 

Section  8  of  this  act  provided — 

''That  the  standard  for  both  gold  and  silver  coins  of  the  United 
States  shall  hereafter  be  such  that  of  one  thousand  parts  by  weight 
nine  hundred  shall  be  of  pure  metal  and  one  hundred  of  alloy;  and 
the  alloy  of  the  silver  coins  shall  be  of  copper ;  and  the  alloy  of  the 
gold  coins  shall  be  of  copper  and  silver,  provided  that  the  silver  does 
not  exceed  one-half  of  the  whole  alloy." 

Section  9  provided — 

"That  of  the  silver  coins  the  dollar  shall  be  of  the  weight  of  four 
hundred  and  twelve  and  one-half  grains;  the  half-dollar  of  the 
weight  of  two  hundred  and  six  and  one-fourth  grains  ;  the  quarter 
dollar  of  the  weight  of  one  hundred  and  three  and  one-eighth  grains; 
the  dime,  or  tenth  part  of  a  dollar  of  the  weight  of  forty-one  and  a 
quarter  grains;  and  the  half  dime  or  twentieth  part  of  a  dollar,  of 
the  weight  of  twenty  grains  and  five-eighths  of  a  grain.     And  that 


12 

dollars,  half  dollars,  and  quarter  dollars,  dimes,  and  half  dimes, 
shall  be  legal  tenders  of  payment  according  to  their  nominal  value, 
for  any  sums  whatever." 

Section  10  provided — 

''That  of  the  gold  coins,  the  weight  of  the  eagle  shall  be  twa 
hundred  and  fifty-eight  grains  ;  that  of  the  half  eagle  one  hundred 
and  twenty-nine  grains,  and  that  of  the  quarter  eagle  sixty-four  and 
one-half  grains.  And  that  for  all  suras  whatever,  the  eagle  shall  be 
a  legal  tender  of  payment  for  ten  dollars;  the  half  eagle  for  five 
dollars,  and  the  quarter  eagle  for  two  and  a  half  dollars." 

Section  11  provided — 

"  That  the  silver  coins  heretofore  issued  at  the  mint  of  the  United 
States,  and  the  gold  coins  issued  since  the  thirty-first  day  of  July, 
one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  thirty-four,  shall  continue  to  oe 
legal  tenders  of  payment  for  their  nominal  values  on  the  same  term* 
as  if  they  were  of  the  coinage  provided  for  by  this  act." 

The  only  change  made  in  the  gold  coins  by  this  act,  from  the  act 
of  1884,  was,  that  by  this  act  the  alloy  in  gold  coins  as  well  as  in  sil- 
ver coins  was  made  exactly  one-tenth  ;  that  is,  the  standard  for  coins 
of  bath  metals  was  made  by  this  act  nine-tenths  fine;  and  since  th- 
passage  of  this  act  standard  gold  and  standard  silver  is  understood  to 
be  gold  or  silver  nine-tenths  fine.  To  bring  the  alloy  in  gold  coins 
to  exactly  one-tenth  of  the  weight  of  the  coin,  the  small  fraction  of 
two-tenths  of  a  grain  of  pure  gold  was  added  to  the  weight  of  th<}. 
eagle,  or  two-hundredths  of  a  grain  to  a  dollar,  and  the  alloy  re- 
duced by  the  same  amount;  so  that  the  weight  of  the  eagle  remained 
exactly  the  same  under  both  acts  ;  that  is,  two  hundred  and  fifty- 
eight  grains  for  the  eagle  piece,  or  twenty-five  and  eight-tenthcf 
grains  to  the  dollar.  But  by  this  change  ra  the  relative  weight  of 
pure  metal  and  alloy,  the  ratio  between  gold  and  silver  coins  was 
changed  from  almost  exactly  16  to  l,to  15.988+  to  l,our  present  ratio. 

After  providing  for  devices,  legends,  etc.,  on  the  various  coins,, 
section  14  provided — 

"That  gold  and  silver  bullion  brought  to  the  mint  for  coinage 
shall  be  received  and  coined,  by  the  proper  ofiicers,  for  the  benefit  of 
the  depositor." 

It  was  made  lawful  by  this  act  to  refuse  a  deposit  of  less  value 
than  one  hundred  dollars,  or  of  bullion  so  base  as  to  be  unsuitable 
for  the  mint. 

Depositors  were  to  be  paid  for  bullion  in  coin,  and  in  the  order  in 
which  deposits  were  made. 


Sections  15  and  19  provided  for  weighing  deposits  in  the  presence 
of  the  depositor,  and  for  giving  a  certificate  for  the  net  amount 
"to  be  paid  in  coins  of  the  same  species  of  bullion  as  that  deposited." 

Section  18  specified  what  charges  the  depositor  of  bullion  should  be 
subject  to.  These  are:  "For  refining  when  the  bullion  is  below 
standard,"  for  purifying  "when  metals  are  contained  in  it  which 
render  it  unfit  for  coining,"  &c.  These  charges  were  not  to  exceed, 
however,  the  cost  to  the  mint  of  the  labor  and  materials  required  to 
bring  the  metals  to  the  proper  standard. 

Hence_,  between  the  act  of  1792,  establishing  the  mint,  and  the  act  of 
1837,  no  change  whatever  was  made  in  the  silver  coins,  and  the  only 
change  made  in  these  coins  by  the  act  of  1837  was  the  change  in  the 
alloy  from  44f  grains,  as  contained  in  the  dollar  of  the  act  of  1792, 
to  414"  grains  ;  the  pure  silver  being  left  the  same  exactly  by  the  act 
of  1837  as  it  was  in  the  original  act  of  1792. 

The  pure  gold  was  changed  from  24.75  grains  to  a  dollar,  as  in 
the  act  of  1792,  to  23.22  grains,  as  fixed  in  the  act  of  1837. 

As  three  hundred  and  seventy-one  and  one-fourth  grains  is  the 
weight  of  pure  silver  in  our  present  standard  dollar,  it  will  be  seen 
that  this  unit  has  therefore  never  varied  in  weight  of  pure  metal 
through  all  the  changes  of  our  mint  laws.  It  stands  to-day  the 
same  dollar  it  was  when  our  mone}'  system  was  established. 

By  the  act  of  March  3,  1843,  British  gold  coins  were  made  legal 
tender  at  the  rate  of  94.6  cents  per  pennyweight;  French  gold  coins, 
nine-tenths  fine,  were  made  legal  tender  at  the  rate  of  92.9  per  penny- 
weight. By  the  same  act  the  silver  dollars  of  Mexico,  Peru  and 
Bolivia  were  made  legal  tender  at  their  nominal  value  ;  the  French 
five-franc  piece  w^as  made  legal  tender  for  93  cents. 

The  act  of  March  3, 1849,  provided  for  the  gold  dollar  piece  to  con- 
tain 25.8  grains  of  standard  gold,  and  "to  be  of  the  value  of  one 
dollar,  or  unit."  This  act  also  provided  for  a  twenty-dollar  piece. 

The  act  of  March  3,  1851,  provided  for  coining  the  three-cent  piece 
to  meet  the  requirements  of  the  three-cent  postage  law. 

The  change  in  the  ratio  to  16  to  1,  in  1834,  while  the  European  ratio 
stood  at  15^  to  1,  led  to  the  exportation  of  nearly  all  our  full  weight  sil- 
ver coins.  For,  by  this  variation  in  the  ratio  between  the  two  metals  in 
the  United  States  and  in  Europe,  full  weight  silver  coins  were  worth 
for  export  a  little  more  than  three  per  cent,  more  than  our  gold  coins  ; 
and  as  our  subsidiary  coins  contained  proportionally  the  same  weight 
of  pure  silver  contained  in  the  dollar  piece,  it  was  as  profitable  to 
export  these  coins  as  the  dollar  piece  ;  consequently  the   country 


14 

was  well  nigh  depleted  of  small  coins.  To  remedy  this  evil  Con- 
gress, by  the  act  of  February  21,  1853,  reduced  the  weight  of  the 
half  dollar  from  206^^  grains  to  192  grains  standard  silver,  and  the 
smaller  silver  coins  in  proportion.  Until  this  act,  fractional  silver 
coins  were  legal  tender  for  all  sums ;  but  by  this  act  they  were  made 
legal  tender  for  five  dollars  only. 

Deposits  of  silver  for  coinage  into  fractional  pieces  for  the  benefit 
of  the  depositor  were  no  longer  received,  but  provision  was  made  for 
the  purchase  of  silver  bullion,  on  Government  account,  for  the  fabri- 
cation of  the  light-weight  subsidiary  coins.  The  same  act  provided  for 
the  redemption  of  subsidiary  coins,  and  for  their  transmission  to 
assistant  treasurers  and  depositaries  free  of  charge. 

Section  6  of  this  act  provided  that  depositors  might,  at  their 
option,  have  their  gold  and  silver  cast  into  ingots  or  bars. 

Section  7  of  the  same  act  provided  for  the  coinage  of  the  three- 
dollar  gold  piece,  which,  like  the  three-cent  silver  piece,  was  never 
a  popular  coin. 

We  come  next  to  the  act  of  February  21,  1857,  by  which  all  foreign 
coins  were  deprived  of  currency  in  the  United  States.  The  old 
Spanish  quarter,  the  shilling  or  eighth,  the  six  pence,  or  sixteenth 
of  the  Spanish  milled  dollar,  and  of  the  Mexican  dollar,  which  had 
passed  current  for  twenty-five,  twelve  and  a  half,  and  six  and  one- 
fourth  cents,  respectively,  were  made  receivable  by  the  Government 
for  twenty,  ten  and  five  cents,  respectively,  and  when  so  received 
they  were  to  be  reminted  into  American  coins. 

Section  3  of  this  act  provided — 

"That  all  former  acts  authorizing  the  currency  of  foreign  gold  or 
silver  coins,  and  declaring  the  same  a  legal  tender  in  payment  for 
debts  are  hereby  repealed." 

This  act  also  provided  for  the  present  form  of  the  cent  piece  of  72 
grains,  composed  of  copper  and  nickel.  The  five-cent  nickel  piece  to 
take  the  place  of  fractional  currency  and  to  be  a  legal  tender  for  one 
dollar  was  provided  for  by  the  act  of  May  16,  1866. 

The  next  act  affecting  the  coinage  of  the  country  was  the  unfor- 
tunate act  of  1873,  which  will  be  made  the  subject  of  the  next 
chapter. 

From  this  summary  of  the  coinage  laws  of  the  United  States,  it  will  be 
seen  that,  from  the  foundation  ofthe  mint  down  tol873,goldand  silver 
stood  upon  a  plane  of  absolute  equality  as  to  all  rights  of  mintage  and 
power  of  legal  tender.     The  unit  rested  on  both  metals  alike.     No 


]5 

discrimination  whatever  was  made,  in  any  act,  between  the  two 
metals.  Holders  of  gold  and  silver  bullion  were  allowed,  throughout 
this  period  of  more  than  three  quarters  of  a  century,  without  any  dis- 
crimination whatever,  to  deposit  their  metal  and  have  the  same 
coined  for  their  benefit  into  the  various  full  legal-tender  coins  pre- 
scribed by  Congress,  without  limit  and  free  of  cost,  except  such 
expense  as  might  be  incurred  by  the  mint  to  bring  the  bullion  to  the 
required  standard  for  coinage. 

What  all-controlling  reason  was  there  for  the  change   made  in 
1873? 


CHAPTER  III. 


The  Act  op  18Y3. 

It  was  in  1816,  just  after  the  close  of  the  Napoleonic  wars,  when 
nefther  gold  nor  silver  were  in  circulation  in  England,  and  when  an 
^enormous  debt  had  been  contracted  to  carry  on  her  long  wars,  that 
Lord  Liverpool  secured  the  adoption  of  the  single  gold  standard  for 
England. 

So,  immediately  upon  the  close  of  our  great  war,  when  an  enormous 
debt  had  been  created,  and  when  there  was  neither  gold  nor  silver 
in  circulation  in  the  country,  a  movement  was  quietly  begun  to  cliange 
the  money  standard  of  the  United  States  from  gold  and  silver  to  gold 
alone,  by  demonetizing  silver. 

In  1866  our  effective  money  volume,  for  a  population  of  little  more 
than  30,000,000  of  people,  was  1902,953,635,  and  consisted  entirely 
of  paper  money.  The  outstanding  interest-bearing  debt  at  the  same 
time  was  $2,678,126,103. 

Let  us  put  these  facts  side  by  side — no  gold  or  silver  in  circulation 
in  the  country,  a  volume  of  paper  money  of  over  nine  hundred  millions, 
a  national  debt  of  nearly  three  thousand  millions,  with  large  State 
and  municipal  debts,  created  mainly  for  war  purposes,  besides  vast 
corporate  and  private  debts — then  ask  what  there  was  in  the  situa- 
tion at  that  time  to  demand  or  suggest  a  change  in  the  money  standard 
of  the  United  States  from  gold  and  silver,  as  established  by  the  Con- 
stitution, to  gold  alone?  Who  can  consider  for  a  moment  this  state 
of  things  without  astonishment  ?  That  such  a  time  should  have  been 
chosen  to  increase  the  money  standard  is  the  most  unaccountable 
event  in  our  whole  history.  There  could  have  been  but  one  motive, 
and  that  was  to  increase  the  enormous  debts  of  the  country  in  the 
hands  of  the  holders  by  raising  the  standard  by  which  they  must  be 
paid.  This  debt  was  created,  as  is  well  known,  on  a  paper  basis, 
far  below  the  level  of  metallic  money  ;  nor  at  this  time  had  any 
fiteps  been  taken  to  return  to  specie  payments.  Was  it  not  enough 
to  pay  in  coin,  debts  contracted  in  paper  at  fifty  to  sixty  cents  on  the 
dollar?  What  honest  reason  could  there  be  for  changing  the 
metallic  scale  before  we  had  even  started  to  bring  our  paper  money 
up  to  the  coin  level  ? 


17 

There  certainly  is  nothing  in  American  history  that  so  severely 
reflects  upon  American  statesmanship  as  the  transactions  which  led 
up  to  the  demonetization  of  silver. 

The  first  public  manifestation  of  a  purpose  to  secure  the  demoneti- 
zation of  silver  in  the  United  States  was  given  at  the  International 
Conference  held  at  Paris  in  1867.  The  representative  from  the 
JJnited  States  to  that  Conference  was  Samuel  B.  Ruggles,  a  member 
of  the  Chamber  of  Commerce  of  New  York,  who,  it  seems,  had  pro- 
cured an  appointment  as  delegate  to  that  Conference.  Mr.  Sherman, 
of  Ohio,  who  was  at  this  time  Chairman  of  the  Finance  Committee 
of  the  Senate,  appears  also  by  pre-arrangement  to  have  made  his  way 
to  Paris,  where  he  was  in  communication  with  Mr.  Ruggles,  and 
where  his  influence  was  added  to  that  of  Mr.  Ruggles  to  induce 
the  Conference  to  declare  for  a  single  gold  standard. 

May  17,  1867,  Mr.  Ruggles  advises  Mr.  Sherman,  both  being  in 
Paris,  that  the  Conference  was  then  in  session,  "  to  agree,  if  possible, 
on  a  common  unit  of  money,'*  and  that  the  proposition  was  to  adept 
as  the  common  unit  the  French  five-franc  gold  piece,  and  asked  Mr. 
Sherman  what  he  thought  of  such  a  change.  Mr.  Sherman  replied 
on  the  following  day  favoring  the  proposition,  and  saying:  "If 
this  is  done,  France  will  surely  abandon  the  impossible  efibrt  of  mak- 
ing two  standards  of  value.  '  Gold  coins  will  answer  all  the  pur- 
poses of  Europe.'  "  Mr.  Sherman's  views  were  communicated  by 
Mr.  Ruggles  to  the  Conference,  as  those  of  the  chairman  of  the  Senate 
Finance  Committee. 

This  letter  of  Mr.  Sherman  to  Mr.  Ruggles  affords  something  of 
a  key  to  the  mystery  surrounding  the  inception  of  the  gold  standard 
movement.  He  speaks  of  the  ^^  impossible"  effort  of  making  "  two 
standards  of  value,"  and  that  at  Paris,  where  the  double  standard 
had  been  maintained  without  variation  from  1803.  It  is  evident  that 
Mr.  Sherman  at  this  time  was  imbued  with  the  mischievous  idea,  which 
seemed  to  dominate  all  his  actions,  that  gold  possessed  ''  intrinsic  " 
value,  which  made  it  b.  fixed  standard  for  the  world.  At  least,  it  is 
charitable  to  presume  that  he  believed  what  he  stated  in  his  letter  to 
Mr.  Ruggles  ;  other  w^ise  he  would  stand  charged  with  the  monstrous 
crime  of  plotting  to  double  the  burden  of  debt  of  his  own  country, 
then  largely  held  in  Europe. 

The  ignorance  of  the  true  theory  of  money  displayed  in  his  advice 
to  the  Paris  Conference  should,  however,  have  disqualified  liim  from 
having  anything  further  to  do  with  the  practical  management  of  the 
finances  of  the  country. 


18 

But  there  seems,  unfortunately,  to  have  been  no  one  else  then  promi- 
nent in  public  affairs  any  better  informed  on  money  questions  than 
Mr.  Sherman.  For  it  appears  to  be  a  fact,  however  humiliating  to 
admit  it,  that  in  this  country  pretty  much  all  knowledge  of  the 
literature  on  the  subject  of  money  had  been  lost.  If  there  was  a 
man  in  public  life  in  the  United  States  at  this  time  who  had  any  cojjh 
siderable  acquaintance  with  the  literature  that  arose  out  of  the  dis- 
cussions of  the  problems  of  suspension  and  resumption  in  England, 
and  subsequent  measures  leading  to  the  Bank  Act  of  1844,  he  made 
no  exhibition  of  it.  Other  questions  had  absorbed  the  attention  of  our 
people,  and  then  came  the  war,  so  that  a  generation  had  passed 
since  the  money  question  had  been  under  discussion  in  this  country, 
and  all  knowledge  of  the  science  of  money  and  of  the  literature  on 
that  subject  had  been  practically  lost.  We  had  had  men  distin- 
guished for  their  knowledge  of  monetary  science,  Hamilton,  Albert 
Gallatin,  Conde  Raguet,  Secretaries  Crawford,  Hunter  and  Guthrie  ; 
but  these  were  of  another  generation.  But  if  ignorance  on  the  question 
of  money  prevailed  in  this  country,  shrewd  observers  of  the  situation 
were  not  wanting  in  other  countries. 

Men  trained  in  the  school  of  Eicardo  well  understood  that, 
with  the  vast  debts  created  by  the  American  and  the  Franco- 
Prussian  wars,  if  the  money  standard  for  the  world  could  be 
changed  from  gold  and  silver  to  gold  alone,  the  eifect  would  be  to 
enormously  enhance  the  holdings  of  creditors  and  creditor  nations  ; 
and  at  this  time  our  national  debt  was  largely  held  in  Europe.  Here 
was  the  motive  and  here  the  opportunity.  A  world  was  open  to 
plunder.  Nothing  could  be  plainer.  It  were  folly  to  attempt  to 
disguise  either  the  motive  or  the  opportunity.  But  morally  con- 
sidered the  change  in  the  money  standard,  at  such  a  time  and  for 
such  a  purpose,  was  simply  an  act  of  spoliation,  no  more  justifiable  in 
the  abstract  than  theft  or  piracy.  That  the  demonetization  of  silver 
did  alter  the  money  standard  by  changing  it  from  both  gold  and 
silver  to  gold  alone,  is  too  well  understood  now  to  be  questioned  hj 
anybody  ;  that  the  object  of  changing  the  standard  was  to  enable  the 
creditor  class  and  creditor  nations  to  exact,  under  the  form  of  law, 
what  they  had  no  shadow  of  claim  to  in  equity,  is  too  apparent,  also, 
"  to  admit  of  denial.  The  effect  was  what  was  forecalculated  and  in- 
tended. The  demonetization  of  silver  increased  the  value  of  gold,  and 
made  gold  itself  a  different  standard  from  what  it  would  have  been 
with  silver  circulating  side  by  side  with  it.     The  change  in  the  money 


19 

standard  thus  effected  added,  at  one  stroke,  fifty  per  cent,  to  the  debt 
burden  of  the  United  States.  It  not  only  increased  the  burden  of 
public  debts,  but  it  increased  every  private  debt  and  changed  the  obli- 
gations involved  in  all  time  contracts  that  had  been  entered  into 
between  man  and  man. 

It  was  the  most  monstrous  piece  of  injustice  ever  enacted  into  law, 
and  it  is  with  shame  that,  as  American  citizens,  we  have  to  admit 
that  in  this  transaction  our  statesmen  were  completely  outwitted. 

The  influence  which  led  up  to  this  crime  against  the  American 
people  came  from  the  banking  circles  of  London,  Frankfort  and 
Berlin,  operating  first  through  the  foreign  banks  of  New  York  and 
from  them  to  other  banks.  They  stood  together  in  this  scheme  for 
plunder  and  controlled  the  metropolitan  press  of  both  continents. 
They  harped  continually  on  such  catch-phrases  as  "  honest  money," 
"cheap  money,"  ''the  best  money,"  "light-weight  dollar,"  and 
other  like  phrases,  to  delude  the  public  and  bring  to  their  side  the 
religious  press  of  the  country.  Instinctively,  the  credit-holding 
class  everywhere  understood  enough  to  know  that  whatever  dimin- 
ished the  volume  of  money  would  tend  to  increase  their  holdings. 

The  Origin  of  the  Act  of  1873. 

In  June,  1868,  the  year  following  the  Paris  Conference,  Mr. 
Sherman  made  a  report  to  the  United  States  Senate  in  favor  of  "a 
single  standard,  exclusively  of  gold." 

In  the  same  year  Mr.  Sherman  introduced  a  bill  in  the  Senate — 
Senate  bill  217 — having  for  its  object  the  establishment  of  a  single 
standard,  "  exclusively  of  gold  "  with  silver  to  be  coined  on  Govern- 
ment account  only,  for  subsidiary  purposes,  the  coins  being  made  to 
conform  to  the  weight  of  the  silver  coins  of  France.  This  bill 
was  accompanied  by  a  report  of  some  length  recommending  a  reduc- 
tion of  the  weight  of  the  gold  dollar  to  24.89  grains. 

Again  in  April  28,  1870,  Mr.  Sherman  introduced  a  bill  in  the 
Senate  "revising  the  laws  relating  to  the  mints,  assay  offices  and 
coinage  of  the  United  States,"  which  was  referred  to  the  Finance 
Committee. 

This  bill  was  accompanied  by  a  letter  from  Secretary  Boutwell,  in 
which  he  states  that  there  had  been  no  revision  of  the  laws  pertain- 
ing to  the  mint  and  coinage  since  1837,  and  that  "  the  passage  of  the 
inclosed  bill"  would  "conduce  to  the  efficiency  and  economy  of  this 


20 

Important  branch  of  the  Government  service."     He  also  inclosed  a 
report  from  Deputy  Comptroller  Knox,  all  of  wiiich  were  printed. 

Various  other  reports  and  recommendations  from  subordinate  offi- 
fcials  of  the  Treasury  Department  and  the  Mint,  seem  to  have  gone 
along  together  with  the  original  bill,  to  the  two  Houses  ;  but  there 
was  nothing  that  showed  the  slightest  comprehension  of  the  eco- 
nomic effect  of  dropping  the  silver  dollar  or  of  demonetizing  silver. 

On  the  19th  of  December,  1870,  Mr.  Sherman  reported  the  bill 
back  to  the  Senate  with  some  amendments,  one  making  a  charge  for 
coinage.  There  was  some  debate  on  the  proposed  charge  for  coinage, 
but  on  no  other  featuve  of  the  bill. 

The  bill  was  voted  on  in  committee  January  9,  18*71,  and  carried 
with  the  amendment  providing  for  a  charge  for  coinage,  by  26  to  22  ; 
but  on  the  following  day  a  vote- was  taken  in  the  Senate  and  the  vote 
in  the  committee  was  reversed  and  the  coinage  charge  stricken  out. 
The  bill  was  then  passed  by  36  to  14,  Mr.  Sherman,  who  had  voted 
for  the  amendment  in  committee,  voting  against  the  bill  on  its  final 
passage. 

The  Bill  in  the  House. 

The  bill  as  it  passed  the  Senate  went  to  the  House,  and,  January 
11,  1871,  was  referred  to  the  Committee  on  Coinage,  Weights  and 
Measures. 

On  the  25th  of  February,  Mr.  Kelley  reported  the  bill  back  to  the 
House  with  certain  amendments. 

In  the  Forty-second  Congress,  extra  session,  March  9,  1871,  Mr. 
Kelley  reintroduced  the  same  bill,  to  go  to  the  Committee  on  Coinage, 
Weights  and  Measures,  "  when  appointed." 

At  the  second  session  (first  regular  session),  January  9,  1872,  Mr. 
Kelley  reported  the  bill  back  to  the  House  without  amendment. 

In  explaining  the  bill  Mr.  Kelley  said  :  "  It  is  a  measure  origi- 
nated  by  the  Treasury  Department.  The  mint  laws  of  this  country 
have  never  been  revised  ;"  and  went  on  to  explain  the  difficulty  of 
administering  the  affairs  of  the  mint  and  the  necessity  of  a  codifica- 
tion of  the  laws,  and  stated  that  a  "commission  of  learned  gentlemen" 
had  been  appointed  to  carefully  arrange  the  details  of  the  mint 
regulations.  He  spoke  of  the  attention  given  to  the  subject  by  the 
previous  Congress,  but  said  "the  bill  has  not  received  the  same 
elaborate  consideration  from  the  Committee  on  Coinage,  Weights 
and  Measures  of  this  House,  but  the  attention  of  each  member  was 
brought  to  it,"  &c. 


21 

This  admission  of  Mr.  Kelley  on  the  floor  of  the  House,  on  first 
reporting  the  bill,  may  help  to  explain  the  answers  he  made  to  the 
questions  asked  him  by  Mr.  Potter,  of  New  York : 

'•Mr.  Potter.  I  desire,  in  the  first  place,  to  ask  the  gentleman 
who  has  this  bill  in  charge  whether,  if  it  becomes  a  law,  it  will  make 
any  change  in  the  value  of  the  coin  issued  pursuant  to  its  provisions 
from  the  value  of  the  coin  which  now  exists  ?" 

"  Mr.  Kelley.     It  does  not." 

"  Mr.  Potter.  Does  it  make  any  change  in  the  standard  of  weight 
or  of  fineness  of  the  coin  ?  " 

"  Mr.  Kelley.     It  does  not." 

"Mr.  Potter.  Does  it  provide  for  any  new  kind  of  coin  ;  coin  of 
any  new  denomination  other  than  that  which  is  now  coined?" 

"  Mr.  Kelley.     It  does  not." 

A  careful  examination,  however,  of  the  bill  at  this  stage  shows 
that  Mr.  Kelley  was  mistaken,  and  that  he  did  not  understand  him- 
Belf  all  that  the  bill  he  was  reporting  contained.  In  his  own  re- 
marks respecting  the  bill  he  had  confined  himself  mainly  to  the 
parts  relating  to  the  Mint. 

There  was  some  discussion  about  the  salary  of  the  Director  of  the 
Mint,  when  the  bill  was  recommitted  to  the  Committee  on  Coinage, 
Weights  and  Measures. 

From  this  time  on  Mr.  Kelley  seems  to  have  left  the  bill  to  Mr. 
Hooper,  of  Massachusetts.  On  the  8th  of  February,  1872,  Mr. 
Hooper  introduced  bill  No.  1427  (see  page  943  of  the  Globe  of  Feb- 
ruary 9).  On  the  13th  of  February  the  bill  was  reported  from  the 
committee  with  amendments,  recommitted  and  printed  (see  page  1004, 
Globe  of  February,  1872). 

Mr.  Neely  claimed  that  the  committee  had  not  been  together  and 
had  not  authorized  the  bill  to  be  reported. 

On  the  9th  of  April  the  bill  was  called  up,  and  a  long  explanatory 
speech  made  on  it  by  Mr.  Hooper,  to  which,  it  would  seem  from 
subsequent  events,  no  one  listened  and  which  no  one  understood. 

On  the  27th  of  May  Mr.  Hooper  called  the  bill  up  again  and 
offered  a  substitute  (H.  R.  2934)  which  he  said  had  been  ''carefully 
prepared"  and  which  he  had  submitted  to  "different  gentlemen 
interested  in  the  subject,"  and  "  it  meets  with  universal  approbation 
in  the  form  in  which  I  offer  it." 

Mr.  Hooper  then  moved  to  suspend  the  rules  and  pass  the  bill. 

Mr.  Holman  said  : 

"  I  suppose  it  is  intended  to  have  the  bill  read  before  it  is  put 
upon  its  passage  ?" 


22 

''The  Speaker.  The  substitute  will  be  read." 

"Mr.  Hooper,  of  Massachusetts.  I  hope  not.  It  is  a  long  bill,  and 
those  who  are  interested  in  it  are  perfectly  familiar  with  its  j)ro- 
Tisions." 

"  Mr.  Kerr,  of  Indiana.  The  rules  cannot  be  suspended  so  as  to 
dispense  with  the  reading  of  the  bill." 

"  The  Speaker.     They  can  be," 

"  Mr.  Kerr.  I  want  the  House  to  understand  that  it  is  attempted  to 
put  through  this  bill  without  being  read." 

After  some  intervening  business  Mr.  Hooper  moved  that  the  rules 
be  suspended  and  the  bill  passed,  which  was  carried — yeas,  110; 
nays,  13  ;  the  yeas  and  nays  not  being  recorded. 

Although  Mr.  Hooper,  in  his  prepared  speech,  referred  to  the 
change  in  the  unit  and  in  the  weight  of  the  dollar,  it  is  doubtful  if 
half  a  dozen  members  understood  even  this  much,  and  probably  not 
one  comprehended  the  real  economic  effect  of  the  measure. 

As  Professor  Loughlin  states,  in  his  History  of  Bimetallism  in  the 
United  States  :  "  The  Senate  occupied  its  time  chiefly  on  questions  of 
seigniorage  and  abrasion  and  the  House  on  a  question  of  the  salaries 
of  the  officials." 

The  Bill  as  it  Passed  the  House. 

In  order  to  get  at  a  correct  understanding  of  the  responsibility  of 
each  House  for  the  passage  of  this  act  it  is  important  to  know  just 
what  the  bill  contained  when  it  passed  the  House. 

As  it  passed  the  House  the  bill  contained  sixty-eight  sections, 
(reduced  to  sixty-seven  in  the  Senate),  and  contained  a  full  revision 
of  the  laws  relating  to  the  Mint. 

The  parts  of  the  act  which  bear  evidence  of  a  concealed  purpose 
are — 

First.  The  following  words  in  section  14:  "The  gold  coins  of  the 
United  States  shall  be  a  one-dollar  piece,  which,  at  the  standard 
weight  of  twenty-five  and  eight-tenths  grains,  shall  he  the  unit  of 
value." 

In  every  act  prior  to  this  the  language  respecting  the  unit  of  value 
was  made  to  apply  equally  to  dollars  of  gold  and  of  silver.  Who  first 
proposed  this  change  has  never  come  to  light.  Did  the  one  who  pro- 
posed it  know  its  far-reaching  consequences?  Undoubtedly  he  who 
devised  it  understood  its  full  significance.  Was  he  an  American  ? 
That  is  hardly  probable,  although  Arnold  was  an  American. 

Second.  Section  16  of  the  act,  as  it  passed  the  House  (15  of  the 
Senate),  provided  "that  the  silver  coins  of  the  United  States  shall  be  a  ^ 


23 

dollar,  a  half-dollar  or  fifty-cent  piece,  a  quarter-dollar  or  tweaty-five- 
cent  piece,  and  a  dime  or  ten-cent  piece  ;  and  the  weight  of  the  dollar 
shall  be  three  hundred  and  eighty-four  grains  ;  the  half-dollar,  quarter 
dollar,  and  the  dime  shall  be,  respectively,  one-half,  one-quarter,  and 
one-tenth  of  the  weight  of  said  dollar  ;  which  coins  shall  be  a  legal 
tender,  at  their  nominal  value,  for  any  amount  not  exceeding  Jive 
dollars  in  any  one  payment." 

So  that  in  the  bill  as  it  passed  the  House  the  old  dollar  of 
412^  grains  was  dropped  out,  and  a  dollar  of  384  grains  (equal 
to  the  French  five-franc  piece)  was  substituted  in  its  place.  This 
dollar,  however,  was  to  be  a  legal  tender  for  only  five  dollars, 
and  to  be  coined  only  on  Government  account.  But  the  most 
remarkable  thing  connected  with  this  proposed  new  dollar  was, 
that,  inasmuch  as  the  weight  of  the  gold  dollar  was  not  to  be 
changed,*  the  change  in  the  weight  of  the  silver  dollar  from  412^ 
grains  to  384  grains,  changed  the  ratio  between  gold  and  silver  from 
16  to  1,  to  14.8  to  1  ;  thus  greatly  overrating  silver  and  underrat- 
ing gold.  If,  with  this  change  of  ratio,  the  coinage  of  silver  had 
been  left  free  we  would  very  quickly  have  had  an  exclusively  silver 
currency  in  this  country.  This  is  manifestly  not  what  those  who  de- 
vised the  scheme  intended,  and  hence  its  legal-tender  function  was 
limited  to  five  dollars. 

Third.  Section  22  of  the  bill  as  it  passed  the  House  contained 
the  following  provision  : 

"Section  22  (21  of  the  Senate).  That  any  owner  of  silver  bullion 
may  deposit  the  same  at  any  mint,  to  be  formed  into  bars  for  his  benefit ; 
no  deposit  for  coinage  into  silver  coin  shall  be  received." 

This  provision  in  the  House  bill  took  away  the  right  to  have  silver 
coined  for  the  benefit  of  the  depositor,  a  right  that  had  existed  from 
the  foundation  of  the  Government.  He  could  have  it  formed  into  bars 
butnotinto  coins.  The  substitution  of  the  word  "bars"  for  "  coins  " 
destroyed  free  coinage.  Anyone  could  have  silver  formed  into  bars 
but  no  longer  made  into  money. 

Thus  we  see  that,  as  the  bill  passed  the  House,  it  contained  four 
things,  which,  taken  together,  (1)  placing  the  unit  on  gold  only  ;  (2) 
dropping  the  old  dollar  of  412^  grains  and  substituting  a  dollar  of  384 


*In  a  report  on  his  bill,  introduced  in  1868,  Mr.  Sherman  recommended  a  reduc- 
■feion  in  the  weight  of  the  gold  dollar  from  25.8  grains  to  24.89  grains,  the  purpose 
being  to  make  both  our  gold  and  silver  coins  conform  in  weight  to  the  coins  of 
France,  which  would  have  fixed  the  ratio  at  15o  ;  but  no  such  provision  was 
talked  of  in  connection  with  this  bill. 


24 

grains  ;  (3)  limiting  the  legal-tender  function  of  the  new  dollar  to  five 
dollars,  and  (4)  taking  away  from  silver  the  right  of  free  coinage. 
And,  strange  as  it  may  seem,  all  this  passed  unnoticed  and  appar- 
ently without  anyone  in  Congress  knowing  what  was  being  accom- 
plished, and  certainly  without  anybody  in  the  country  understanding 
what  was  going  on. 

A  few  Grovernment  officials,  of  a  classVho  have  always  considered 
themselves  agents  of  the  banks  and  other  moneyed  interests  rather  than 
of  the  people  of  the  United  States,  were  the  only  persons  in  the  country  ^ 
out  of  its  entire  population,  who  took  an  active  interest  in  this 
measure.  Among  these  officials  were  Dr.  Linderman,  Director  of  the 
Mint,  and  John  J.  Knox,  Comptroller  of  the  Currency.  As  evidenced 
by  their  writings  before  and  since,  neither  of  these  officers,  however^ 
possessed  a  thorough  knowledge  or  sound  views  on  money  questions, 
but  they  were  ardent  workers  in  getting  through  Congress  this 
juggling  scheme.  It  has  been  stated  on  good  authority,  however, 
that  Dr.  Linderman,  before  his  death,  expressed  his  regret  at  the 
part  he  had  taken, 

Mr.  Knox,  who  has  recently  laid  claim  to  the  principal  credit  for 
this  act,  seems  never  to  have  comprehended  its  true  significance.  If 
the  real  truth  were  known  it  would  doubtless  appear  that  both  of 
these  gentlemen,  as  well  as  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  and  the 
chairman  of  the  Finance  Committee  of  the  Senate,  were  used  as  blind 
tools  to  work  out  the  scheme  devised  by  men  who  well  knew  what  the 
far-reaching  consequences  would  be. 

The  Bill  in  the  Senate. 

The  bill,  as  it  passed  the  House,  went  to  the  Senate,  May  28,  and 
was  referred  to  the  Committee  on  Finance,  of  which  Mr.  Sherman 
was  chairman. 

On  the  16th  of  December,  the  bill  was  reported  back  to  the  Senate 
with  various  amendments.  The  amendments  were  printed  January  "7, 
1873,  and  were  considered  in  the  usual  manner  in  the  Senate,  except 
section  16,  of  the  House  bill.  This  section,  as  before  stated,  pro- 
vided for  a  dollar  of  384  grains^  intended  to  be  the  equivalent  of  the 
five-franc  piece  of  France. 

The  committee  recommended  that  this  section  be  stricken  out,  and 
the  following,  which  now  constitutes  section  3513  of  the  Eevised 
Statutes,  substituted  in  its  place: 

"Section  3513.  The  silver  coins  of  the  United  States  shall  be  a 
trade  dollar,  a  half-dollar,  or  fifty-cent  piece,  a  quarter-dollar,  or 
twenty-five-cent  piece,  a  dime,  or  ten-cent  piece;  and  the  weight  of 


25 

the  trade  dollar  shall  be  four  hundred  and  twenty  grains  troy;  the 
weight  of  the  half-dollar  shall  be  twelve  grams  and  one-half  of  a 
gram;  the  quarter-dollar  and  the  dime  shall  be,  respectively,  one-half 
and  one-fifth  of  the  weight  of  said  half  dollar." 

These  coins  were  all  alike  made  legal  tender  for  five  dollars. 

The  only  change  of  importance  here  is  the  substitution  of  the 
trade  dollar  for  the  dollar  of  384  grains,  as  in  the  House  bill. 

Senator  Stewart,  in  his  speech  in  the  Senate,  June  5,  1890,  shows 
that  no  action  whatever  was  taken  in  the  Senate  on  the  recommen- 
dation of  the  committee  respecting  section  16  of  the  House  bill,  but 
that  after  acting  on  section  15  of  the  bill,  the  next  amendment  to 
the  House  bill  considered  in  the  Senate  was  section  17.  The  amend- 
ment to  section  IT,  however,  related  only  to  minor  coins  and  was 
adopted  without  debate.  Some  other  unimportant  amendments  were 
considered,  such  as  the  devices  and  inscriptions  on  the  coins. 

It  should  be  noted  that  in  the  amendments  of  the  Senate,  the  number 
of  the  sections  of  the  House  bill  stood  all  the  way  one  number  higher 
than  the  number  of  the  same  sections  in  the  Senate  bill.  Thus,  section 
16  of  the  House  bill  was  carried  as  number  15  in  the  Senate  bill.  •  The 
amendment  to  section  19  of  the  House  bill,  or  18  of  the  Senate  bill, 
proposed  to  omit  the  eagle  on  the  silver  coins  and  to  prescribe  in 
lieu  thereof  "  the  weight  and  fineness  of  the  metal,"  and  also,  for  the 
inscription,  "In  God  we  trust."  Was  this  to  cloak  the  contem- 
plated fraud  with  a  pious  mask? 

Senator  Stewart,  in  the  speech  referred  to,  shows  that  the  substi- 
tute for  section  16  of  the  House  bill  was  never  read  or  acted  upon  in 
the  Senate  ;  at  any  rate,  that  there  is  no  record  of  any  such  action. 
Certainly  there  was  no  discussion  whatever  on  the  proposition  to 
drop  out  the  old  dollar,  or  to  include  the  trade-dollar. 

The  provision  for  the  trade  dollar,  in  lieu  of  the  proposed  French 
dollar,  is  as  unaccountable  on  any  rational  theory  of  money  as  are  the 
other  parts  of  the  bill.  The  pretense  (and  it  can  be  treated  only  as 
a  pretense  on  the  supposition  that  the  framers  of  the  bill  knew  what 
they  were  doing)  that  by  making  our  dollar  piece  a  iittle  larger  we 
would  get  more  per  ounce  for  our  silver,  was  too  shallow  to  deceive 
any  but  those  entirely  ignorant  of  the  laws  governing  the  precious 
metals. 

It  is  well  known  that  gold  and  silver  is  valued  in  every  country 
according  to  its  weight  and  fineness,  and  therefore  all  the  silver  ex- 
ported in  the  form  of  trade-dollars  brought  us  not  a  single  penny's 
worth  of  anything  more  than  the  same  weight  of  silver  brought  us 


26 

in  the  form  of  the  old  standard  dollar,  or,  for  that  matter,  any  of  the 
other  silver  coins.  There  never  was  a  time  when  101^  standard  dol- 
lars would  not  buy  as  much  in  any  country  as  one  hundred  trade- 
dollars,  for  the  simple  reason  that  101^  standard  dollars  contained 
as  much  silver  as  one  hundred  trade-dollars  contained. 

To  sum  up  the  provisions  of  the  act  as  it  passed  the  House,  and 
as  it  passed  the  Senate,  and  as  afterwards  amended  in  conference 
committee,  it  will  be  seen  that  section  14  of  the  act  as  it  passed  the 
House  contained  the  insidiou.?  provision,  "That  the  gold  coins  of 
the  United  States  shall  be  a  one-dollar  piece,  which,  at  the  standard 
weight  of  25.8  grains,  shall  he  the  unit  of  value."  While  in  all  laws 
before,  the  unit,  as  shown  in  the  foregoing  chapters,  had  rested  on 
both  metals. 

Section  22  of  the  House  bill  (21  of  the  Senate),  as  already  quoted, 
limited  the  right  of  the  owner  of  silver  to  have  it  formed  into  any- 
thing but  bars.  He  could  no  longer  have  it  formed  into  coins 
for  his  benefit,  which  showed  the  cunning  hand  of  somebody  in  the 
bill  as  it  originally  passed  the  House. 

This  section  (22)  was  changed  in  conference  to  read  as  follows: 

"That  any  owner  of  silver  bullion  may  deposit  the  same  at  any 
mint  to  be  formed  into  bars  or  into  dollars  of  the  iveight  of  four  hun- 
dred and  tioenty  grains  troy,  designated  in  this  act  as  trade-dollars, 
and  no  deposit  of  silver  for  other  coinage  shall  be  received." 

As  will  be  seen  this  amendment  permitted  silver  to  be  coined 
into  trade-dollars  for  the  benefit  of  the  depositor;  but,  as  the  legal- 
tender  limit  was  $5,  this  privilege  was  practically  of  little  value, 
and  by  subsequent  legislation,  the  right  to  have  silver  coined  into 
trade-dollars  and  the  legal-tender  quality  of  the  coin,  were  both 
taken  away. 

The  report  of  the  conference  which  contained  the  above  amend- 
ment was  agreed  to  without  debate,  February  12,  1873,  and  thus 
was  accomplished  the  most  gigantic  financial  fraud  ever  perpetrated 
upon  any  people — an  act  that  must  stand  in  history  as  the  crime  of 
the  age. 

One  searches  in  vain  the  records  of  the  two  Houses  of  Congress  to 
find  in  the  debates  any  reference  whatever  to  the  proposition  to  de- 
monetize silver  and  limit  money  supply  to  one  metal,  or  to  lead  any- 
body to  suppose  that  a  change  was  to  be  made  in  the  money  standard 
from  gold  and  silver  to  gold  alone  ;  much  less  that  the  effect  of  the 
bill   would  be,  after  establishing  the  single  gold  standard,  to  raise 


27 

that  standard  by  increasing  the  value  of  gold.  The  bill  occupied 
but  little  time  in  either  House,  and  what  discussion  took  place  was 
principally  over  minor  matters. 

Nothing  could  better  show  the  indifference  manifested  respect- 
ing this  momentous  act  than  what  Mr.  Sherman  said  when  he 
ealled  the  bill  up  in  the  Senate,  January  17^  1873 — 

''  The  Presiding  Officer.  The  calendar  under  the  Anthony  rule  is 
now  in  order." 

"Mr.  Sherman  :  I  rise  for  the  purpose  of  moving  that  the  Senate 
proceed  to  the  consideration  of  the  mint  bill.  I  will  state  that  this 
bill  will  not  probably  consume  any  more  time  than  the  time  con- 
sumed in  reading  it.  It  passed  the  Senate  two  years  ago  after  full 
debate.  It  was  taken  up  again  in  the  House  during  the  present 
Congress,  and  passed  there.  It  is  a  matter  of  vital  interest  to  the 
Government,  and  I  am  informed  by  officers  of  the  Government  it  is 
important  it  should  pass  promptly.  The  amendments  reported  by 
the  Committee  on  Finance  present  the  points  of  difference  between  the 
two  Houses,  and  they  can  go  to  a  committee  of  conference  without 
having  a  controversy  here  in  the  Senate  about  them.'"^ 

In  discussing  the  proposition  to  make  a  silver  coin  of  exactly  the 
weight  of  the  five-franc  piece,  Mr.  Sherman  said  : 

"  This  bill  proposes  a  silver  coinage  exactly  the  same  as  the  French, 
and  what  are  called  the  associated  nations  of  Europe,  who  have 
adopted  the  international  standard  of  silver  coinage;  that  is,  the 
dollar  provided  for  by  this  bill  is  the  precise  equivalent  of  the  five- 
franc  piece." 

The  following  extract  from  the  debate  in  the  Senate  indicates  also 
something  of  the  purpose  and  the  influences  that  led  to  the  passage  of 
the  act  : 

*'  Mr.  Sherman.  If  the  Senator  will  allow  me,  he  will  see  that  the 
preceding  section  provides  for  coin  which  is  exactly  interchangeable 
with  the  English  shilling  and  the  five-franc  piece  of  France  ;  that 
i«,  a  five-franc  piece  of  France  will  be  the  exact  equivalent  of  a  dol- 
lar of  the  United  States  in  our  silver  coinage  ;  and  in  order  to  show  • 
this  wherever  our  silver  coin  shall  float — and  we  are  providing  that 
it  shall  float  all  over  the  world — we  propose  to  stamp  upon  it,  in- 
stead of  our  eagle,  which  foreigners  may  not  understand,  and  which 
they  may  not  distinguish  from  a  buzzard  or  some  other  bird,  the  in- 
trinsic fineness  and  weight  of  the  coin.  In  this  practical,  utilitarian 
age  the  officers  of  the  Mint  seemed  to  think  it  would  be  better  to  do 
that  than  to  put  the  eagle  on  our  silver  coins.  I  must  confess  I  do  not 
think  it  is  very  imj)ortant ;  but  I  think  the  Senator  ought  to  be  will- 


*Those  who  care  to  read  the  entire  discussions  on  this  bill  in  the  Senate  will 
find  it  in  Senator  Stewart's  speech  of  June  5, 1880. 


28 

ing  to  defer  in  these  matters  to  the  practical  knowledge  of  the  offi- 
cers who  have  charge  of  this  branch  of  the  Government  service.  I 
will  say  that  Mr.  Linderman,  whom  the  Senator  must  know,  has 
suggested  this  as  being  a  convenient  mode  of  promoting  international 
coinage.'' 

"  Mr.  Casserly.  We  cannot  have  an  international  coinage  on  the 
basis  of  our  silver  coin  unless  our  silver  coin  is  up  to  the  standard  of 
all  the  nations  with  which  we  expect  to  have  relations.  Now,  I  ask 
the  Senator  whether  this  bill  proposes  a  silver  coinage  of  that  char- 
acter." 

"  Mr.  Sherman.  This  bill  proposes  a  silver  coinage  exactly  the  same 
as  the  French,  and  what  are  called  the  associated  nations  of  Europe, 
who  have  adopted  the  international  standard  of  silver  coinage ;  that 
is,  the  dollar  provided  for  by  this  bill  is  the  precise  equivalent  of  the 
five-franc  piece.  It  contains  the  same  number  of  grams  of  silver; 
and  we  have  adopted  the  international  gram  instead  of  the  grain  for 
the  standard  of  our  silver  coinage.  The  '  trade-dollar '  has  been 
adopted  mainly  for  the  benefit  of  the  people  of  California,  and  others 
engaged  in  trade  with  China.  That  is  the  only  coin  measured  by 
the  grain  instead  of  by  the  gram.  The  intrinsic  value  of  each  is  to 
be  stamped  upon  the  coin." 

''Mr.  Casserly.  Do  I  understand  the  Senator  to  say,  then, that 
the  intrinsic  value  of  the  dollar,  half-dollar,  and  quarter-dollar  is 
raised  by  this  bill?" 

"Mr.  Sherman.  There  is  a  difierence  of  about  one-half  of  1  per 
cent." 

"Mr.  Casserly.  I  suppose  it  must  be  raised  to  the  basis  of  inter- 
national exchange." 

''Mr.  Sherman.  I  think  it  is  slightly  raised,  so  as  to  conform 
with  foreign  coins.  The  Chamber  of  Commerce  of  New  York  first 
recommended  this  change,  and  it  has  been  adopted,  I  believe,  by  all 
the  learned  societies  who  have  given  attention  to  coinage,  and  has 
been  recommended  to  us  I  believe  as  the  general  desire.  That  is 
embodied  in  these  three  or  four  sections  of  amendment,  to  make  our 
silver  coinage  correspond  in  exact  form  and  dimensions,  and  shape  and 
•stamp,  with  the  coinage  of  the  associated  nations  of  Europe,  who  have 
adopted  an  international  silver  coinage'.  I  do  not  like  myself  to  break 
in  upon  this  plan  or  to  change  it  in  the  slightest  degree,  but  prefer 
to  leave  it  to  the  proper  officers  of  the  Mint.  Indeed,  I  would  be  per- 
fectly willing  to  leave  the  whole  thing  to  the  officers  of  the  Minfe 
rather  than  to  fix  it  by  law.  That  was  not  deemed  convenient,  and 
therefore  we  had  to  drop  the  American  eagle  from  these  minor  silver 
coins." 

Did  Mr.  Sherman  supi30se  that  a  coin  on  the  ratio  to  gold  of  14.8 
to  1,  and  legal-tender  for  but  five  dollars,  would  be  a  coin  that  would 
float  all  over  the  world  ?     What  folly  1 

As  no  reference  whatever  was  made  in  the  debates  in  the  Senate  to 


29 

the  provision  in  section  14,  by  which  the  unit  was  restricted  to  gold, 
and  none  to  section  22  of  the  House  bill,  which  took  away  the 
right  to  have  silver  coined  for  the  benefit  of  the  depositor,  thereby 
putting  an  end  to  free  coinage  ;  the  query  has  been  often  made  who, 
if  anyone,  knew  the  bill  contained  these  provisions,  and  who,  if  any- 
one, knew  or  understood  the  necessary  economic  eifect  of  these  pro- 
visions. Mr.  Sherman,  as  chairman  of  the  Finance  Committee  of  the 
Senate,  and  the  head  of  the  conference  committee,  undoubtedly  knew 
that  the  act  contained  these  provisions  ;  but  did  he  have  any  concep- 
tion of  their  necessary  economic  effect  upon  the  country  ?  Did  he 
realize  that,  by  demonetizing  silver,  the  value  of  gold  would  be 
increased  the  world  over,  and  thereby  the  enormous  debt  of  the 
country  greatly  augmented  ?  Did  he  comprehend  that  the  necessary 
effect  of  such  a  change  in  the  money  standard  as  the  act  compassed, 
would  violate  the  equities  involved  in  all  public  and  private  obliga- 
tions? 

It  is  but  charitable  to  presume  that  he  did  not  know  this,  and  that 
this  act,  so  far  as  our  statesmen  were  concerned,  was  not  a  crime 
outright  but  an  egregious  blunder.  But  Mr.  Sherman  has  not  yet 
said  which  horn  of  the  dilemma  he  chose  to  take.  Other  mem- 
bers of  the  Senate  and  members  of  the  House,  as  will  appear  from 
quotations  that  follow,  have  frankly  stated  their  relations  to  this 
unfortunate  act.  But  it  will  bear  to  be  repeated  that  somebody  did 
know  what  the  act  contained,  and  that  its  economic  effect  would  b€ 
just  what  it  was  intended  it  should  be,  and  just  what  it  has  been.  Mr. 
Hooper,  in  the  debate  in  the  House,  April  19,  1872,  let  drop  a  remark 
which  may  help  to  explain  the  origin  of  the  deep-laid  plot  to  change 
the  money  standard  of  the  United  States  and,  if  possible,  of  the 
■world. 

The  following  is  Mr.  Hooper's  admission  : 

"Mr.  Ernest  Seyd,  of  London,  a  distinguished  writer,  who  has 
given  great  attention  to  mints  and  coinage,  after  examining  the 
first  draft  of  the  \)\\\,  furnished  many  valuable  suggestions,  which  have 
been  incorporated  in  this  bill." 

It  would  be  interesting  to  know  just  what  parts  of  the  bill  Mr.  Seyd 
''  furnished."  It  is  hardly  probable  that  he  came  all  the  way  from 
England  to  make  suggestions  about  the  practical  running  of  our  mints 
or  about  devices  on  our  coins,  for  what  difference  did  it  make  to  an 
Englishman  whether  the  image  on  our  coins  was  an  eagle  or  a 
buzzard?      Nor  is  it  likely  that  he  came  all  the  way  to  the  United 


30 

States  to  suggest  that  the  inscription  "  In  God  we  trust"  be  placed 
on  our  coins.  There  were  things,  however,  in  the  bill  that  did 
concern  Englishmen,  and  did  concern  holders  of  our  bonds  every- 
where. Is  it  not  reasonable  to  presume  that  the  parts  so  generously 
''furnished"  by  Mr.  Seyd  to  the  House  committee  were  the  cunningly- 
devised  parts  of  sections  14,  16,  and  22,  which  demonetized  silver 
and  set  up  the  gold  standard  ?  * 

Is  not  the  whole  history  of  this  act  most  humiliating  to  us  as  a 
people,  and  does  it  not  justify  the  witty  characterization  of  the  trans- 
action made  at  the  St.  Louis  silver  convention  by  the  Hon.  Thomas 
Fitch,  of  Nevada,  when  he  said  : 

"That  nation  which  consumes  50  percent,  and  produces  but  7  per 
cent,  of  the  world's  supply  of  silver,  beguiled  the  nation  which  pro- 
duces nearly  50  per  cent,  and  consumes  25  per  cent,  of  the  world's 
supply  of  silver  into  a  conspiracy  to  strike  35  per  cent,  from  the  value 
of  silver  !  That  nation  which  is  the  greatest  importer  of  wheat  in 
the  world,  inveigled  the  nation  which  is  the  greatest  exporter  of 
wheat  in  the  world  into  a  financial  and  commercial  dead  fall  where 
35  per  cent,  was  taken  from  the  value  of  wheat.  The  nation  whose 
looms  would  be  idle,  and  whose  people  would  be  hungry,  and  whose 
government  would  be  upheaved  upon  a  storm  of  riot  if  without  a  supply 
of  American  cotton,  deceived  the  nation  which  is  the  greatest  pro- 
ducer of  cotton  into  striking  35  per  cent,  from  the  value  of  cotton. 
Why,  gentlemen,  England  is  the  bunco-steerer  of  the  world.  [Ap- 
plause.] And  Uncle  Sam  the  gentleman  from  the  rural  districts." 
[Applause.] 

And  is  it  not  strange  that  this  wrong  was  committed  in  1873 
against  a  people  having  full  control  of  their  government,  and  that 
they  have  not  yet  righted  the  wrong? 

Explanations  of  Senators  and  Representatives. 

The  following  extracts  from  admissions  of  distinguished  Senators 
and  Representatives  concerned  in  the  passage  of  the  act  of  1873, 
show  better  than  anything  that  can  be  said  by  others,  how  and  why 
the  act  was  passed. 

In  a  discussion  which  took  place  in  the  first  session  of  the  Fiftieth. 
Congress  between  Mr.  Beck  and  Mr.  Sherman,  Mr.  Beck  said : 

"  Mr.  Beck.  What  I  complain  of,  and  what  I  think  I  have  proved, 
is  that  the  House  never  knew  wliat  was  in  that  bill. 

*  *  *  *  nii  «  1^ 


*Mr.  SeyJ,  it  is  true,  became  afterwards  an  able  advocate  of  bimetallism,  but  for 
what  else  was  he  sent  to  Washington  at  this  time  ? 


31 

"  I  need  not  waste  time  in  regard  to  what  took  place  when  the 
House  bill  reached  the  Senate.  The  Senator  from  Nevada  [Mr.  Stew- 
art] has  shown  very  fully  what  took  place  there.  If  the  Senator 
from  Ohio  is  content  with  that  statement  I  am.  Mr.  Casserly,  of 
California,  was  in  the  Senate  and  other  able  and  distinguished  rep- 
resentatives of  silver-producing  States.  Mr.  Corbett,  of  Oregon,  and 
others  took  part  in  the  debate.  Will  any  sane  man  believe  that  they 
deliberately  consented  to  strike  down  silver  coinage  ?  Mr.  Sherman 
Bays  they  all  did.  I  do  not  believe  him.  When  the  House  bill  was 
brought  up  by  Mr.  Sherman  the  record  shows  that  he  used  this  lan- 
guage : 

"  '  Mr.  Sherman.  I  rise  for  the  purpose  of  moving  that  the  Senate 
proceed  to  the  consideration  of  the  Mint  bill.  I  will  state  that  this 
bill  will  not  probably  consume  any  more  time  than  the  time  con- 
sumed in  reading  it.  It  passed  the  Senate  two  years  ago  after  full 
debate.  It  was  taken  up  again  in  the  House  during  the  present 
Congress  and  passed  there.  It  is  a  matter  of  vital  interest  to  the 
Government,  and  I  am  informed  by  officers  of  the  Government  it  is 
important  it  should  pass  promptly.  The  amendments  reported  by 
the  Committee  on  Finance  present  the  points  of  difference  between 
the  two  Houses,  and  they  can  go  to  a  committee  of  conference  with- 
out liaving  a  controversy  here  in  the  Senate  about  them.' 

"  Again  he  said  : 

"  '  If  the  Senator  will  allow  me,  he  will  see  that  the  preceding 
section  provides  for  coin  which  is  exactly  interchangeable  with  the 
English  shilling  and  the  five-franc  piece  of  France  ;  that  is,  a  five- 
franc  piece  of  France  will  be  the  exact  equivalent  of  a  dollar  of  the 
United  States  in  our  silver  coinage.'  " 

That  was  stricken  out,  and  there  was  no  such  thing  left  in  the 
bill. 

"  '  And  in  order  to  show  this  wherever  our  silver  coin  shall  float — 
and  we  are  providing  that  it  shall  float  all  over  the  world — we  pro- 
pose to  stamp  upon  it,  instead  of  our  eagle,  which  foreigners  may 
not  understand,  and  which  they  may  not  distinguish  from  a  buzzard 
or  some  other  bird,  the  intrinsic  fineness  and  weight  of  the  coin.  In 
this  practical,  utilitarian  age  the  officers  of  the  Mint  seemed  to  think 
it  would  be  better  to  do  that  than  to  put  the  eagle  on  our  silver  coins. 
I  must  confess  I  do  not  think  it  is  very  important,  but  I  think  the 
Senator  ought  to  be  willing  to  defer  in  these  matters  to  the  practical 
knowledge  of  the  officers  who  have  charge  of  this  branch  of  the 
Government  service.  I  will  say  that  Mr.  Linderman,  whom  the 
Senator  must  know,  has  suggested  this  as  being  a  convenient  mode 
of  promoting  international  coinage.' 

"Did  not  every  word  of  that  indicate  the  continuance  of  silver 
coinage  with  full  legal-tender  quality  as  it  had  always  had  ? 

"  International  coinage  in  a  trade-dollar,  with  a  legal-tender  qual- 
ity of  only  |5,  and  even  that  poor  quality  was  stricken  out  in  1875, 


32 

so  as  to  make  it  simply  merchandise.  That  toas  the  coin  the  Sen- 
ator from  Ohio  said  was  to  float,  and  they  luere  providing  it  should 
float,  all  over  the  world,  loherever  our  flag  floated,  and  that  it  should 
be  international  coinage  equivalent  to  the  coins  of  other  nations. 
Little  wonder  the  Senator  from  Nevada  said  to  him  :  '  Whatever 
may  be  your  construction  of  the  meaning  now,  the  words  used  then 
induced  me  to  vote  with  you,  because  you  made  me  believe  that  you 
were  sending  out  a  bona  fide  silver  dollar  as  good  as  any  in  the 
world.'  The  Senate  so  believed.  The  debate  showed  that  Mr.  Cas- 
serly  announced  that  Nevada  alone  was  then  producing  $20,000,000 
of  silver,  and  the  question  was  as  to  whether  silver  owners  should 
pay  the  coinage  charge  of  half,  a  quarter,  or  one-eighth  per  cent.; 
nothing  was  suggested  anywhere  that  the  silver  dollar  was  to  be 
stricken  down.  The  Senator  from  Ohio  vias  as  silent  as  the  grave  on 
that  subject." 

Judge  Kelley,  of  Pennsylvania,  was  chairman  of  the  Committee 
on  Coinage,  Weights  and  Measures  in  1872  when  the  bill  originally 
passed  the  House.  This  is  what  he  said  on  the  floor  of  the  House 
March  9,  1878  : 

"In  connection  with  the  charge  that  I  advocated  the  bill  which 
demonetized  the  standard  silver  dollar,  I  say  that,  though  the 
chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Coinage,  1  was  as  ignorant  of  the  fact 
that  it  would  demonetize  the  silver  dollar  or  of  its  dropping  the  silver 
dollar  from  our  system  of  coins  as  were  those  distinguished  Senators, 
Messrs.  BlaineandVoorhees,  who  were  then  members  of  the  House,  and 
each  of  whom  a  few  days  since  interrogated  the  other  :  'Did  you  know 
it  was  dropped  when  the  bill  passed?'  'No,'  said  Mr.  Blaine; 
'did  you?'  'No,'  said  Mr.  Voorhees.  I  do  not  think  that  there 
were  three  members  in  the  House  that  knew  it.  I  doubt  whether  Mr. 
Hooper,  who,  in  my  absence  from  the  Committee  on  Coinage  and  at- 
tendance on  the  Committee  of  Ways  and  Means,  managed  the  bill, 
knew  it.  I  say  this  injustice  to  him." — (Congressional  Record,  vol- 
ume 7,  part  2,  Forty-fifth  Congress,  second  session,  page  1605.) 

Again  on  May  10,  1879,  Mr.  Kelley  said: 

"All  I  can  say  is  that  the  Committee  on  Coinage,  Weights  and 
Measures,  who  reported  the  original  bill,  were  faithful  and  able,  and 
scanned  its  provisions  closely;  that  as  their  organ  I  reported  it;  that 
it  contained  provision  for  both  the  standard  silver  dollar  and  the 
trade-dollar.  Never  having  heard  until  a  long  time  after  its  enact- 
ment into  law  of  the  substitution  in  the  Senate  of  the  section  which 
dropped  the  standard  dollar,  I  profess  to  know  nothing  of  its  history; 
but  I  am  prepared  to  say  that  in  all  the  legislation  of  this  country 
there  is  no  mystery  equal  to  the  demonetization  of  the  standard  silver 
dollar  of  the  United  States.  I  have  never  found  a  man  who  could 
tell  just  how  it  came  about  or  why." — {Congressional  Record,  volume 
9,  part  1,  Forty-sixth  Congress,  first  session,  page  1231.) 


And  again: 

''^In  1872,  when  I  made  the  remarks  which  were  cited  by  those 
gentlemen,  and  which  have  been  frequently  quoted  in  both  Houses, 
and  always  with  an  air  as  much  as  to  sa3'^that  to  convict  this  man  of 
ihe  crime  of  having  been  instructed  by  the  logic  of  events  would 
forever  settle  this  momentous  question,  we  were  not  using  coin,  and 
no  gentleman  in  either  House  appears  to  have  appreciated  the  scope 
and  magnitude  of  the  silver  question  or  to  have  given  it  special 
study.  Hence  the  bill — and  I  wish  gentlemen  to  know  what  that 
bill  was;  it  was  a  bill  to  reorganize  the  mints,  not  to  revise  the  coin 
money  of  the  country,  but  reorganize  the  mints,  and  it  was  passed 
without  allusion  in  debate  to  the  question  of  the  retention  or  aban- 
donment of  the  standard  silver  dollar.  The  then  Speaker  of  the 
House,  now  a  distinguished  member  of  the  Senate,  and  Hon.  Mr. 
Voorhees,  of  Indiana,  who  is  also  a  member  of  that  body,  were  then 
members  of  this  House,  and  during  the  last  Congress  this  colloquy 
occurred  between  them.  It  was,  I  think,  denied  by  Mr.  Voorhees 
ihat  members  of  the  House  knew  that  the  bill  proposed  to  demonetize 
the  silver  dollar,  and  to  sustain  his  view  he  said  to  the  ex-Speaker: 
*Did  you  know  it,  sir?'  'No,'  said  Senator  Blaine,  *  did  you?* 
'No,'  replied  Senator  Voorhees. 

"  I  was  chairman  of  the  committee  that  reported  the  original  bill, 
and  I  aver  on  my  honor  that  I  did  not  know  the  fact  that  it  proposed 
to  drop  the  standard  dollar,  and  did  not  learn  that  it  had  done  it  for 
eighteen  months  after  the  passage  of  the  substitute  offered  by  Mr. 
Hooper,  when  I  disputed  the  fact.  The  distinguished  gentleman 
from  Ohio  [Mr.  G-arfield]  who  now  leads  this  side  of  the  House  was 
then  as  now  an  attentive  and  already  a  distinguished  member  of  the 
House;  yet  when  in  joint  debate  before  the  people  of  Ohio  in  October, 
1877,  the  question  arose  as  to  who  was  responsible  for  it>i  demoneti- 
sation, he  frankly  said  he  did  not  know  that  such  a  provision  was  in 
the  bill  when  it  passed  the  House.  I  state  this  the  more  freely  in  his 
absence  because  I  informed  him  that  I  intended  to  do  so;  and  he  re- 
plied, 'It  is  the  case;  I  did  make  that  statement,  and  it  is  true.'  " 

Mr.  Holman,  in  a  speech  delivered  in  the  House  of  Representatives 
July  13,  1876,  said: 

"I  have  before  me  the  record  of  the  proceedings  of  this  House  on 
the  passage  of  that  measure,  a  record  which  no  man  can  read  with- 
out being  convinced  that  the  measure  and  the  method  of  its  passage 
through  this  House  was  a  'colossal  swindle  '  I  assert  that  the  meas- 
ure never  had  the  sanction  of  this  House,  aad  it  does  not  possess  the 
moral  force  of  law."  {Oongressional  Record,  volume  4,  part  6, 
Forty-fourth  Congress,  first  session,  appendix,  page  193.) 

Again  on  August  5,  1876,  he  said  : 

"  The  original  bill  was  simply  a  bill  to  organize  a  bureau  of  mines 
and  coinage.     The  bill  which  finally  passed  the  House  and  which 
ultimately  became  a  law  was  certainly  not  read  in  this  House. 
******** 


34 

''It  was  never  considered  before  the  House  as  it  was  passed.  Up- 
to  the  time  the  bill  came  before  this  House  for  final  passage  the 
measure  had  simply  been  one  to  establish  a  bureau  of  mines  ;  I  be- 
lieve I  use  the  term  correctly  now.  It  came  from  the  Committee  on 
Coinage,  Weights  and  Measures.  The  substitute  Avhich  finally  be- 
came a  law  was  never  read,  and  is  subject  to  the  charge  made  against 
it  by  tlije  gentleman  from  Missouri  [Mr.  Bland],  that  it  was  passed 
by  the  House  without  a  knowledge  of  its  provisions,  especially  upoa 
that  of  coinage. 

"I  myself  asked  the  question  of  Mr.  Hooper,  who  stood  near 
where  I  am  now  standing,  whether  it  changed  the  law  in  regard  to 
coinage.  And  the  answer  of  Mr.  Hooper  certainly  left  the  impres- 
sion upon  the  whole  House  that  the  subject  of  the  coinage  was  not 
affected  by  that  bill,"  {Congressional  Record,  volume  4,  part  6y 
Forty-fourth  Congress,  first  session,  page  5237.) 

Mr.  Cannon,  of  Illinois,  in  a  speech  made  in  the  House  on  July 
13,  1876,  said  : 

"  This  legislation  was  had  in  the  Forty-second  Congress,  Febru- 
ary 12,  1873,  by  a  bill  to  regulate  the  mints  of  the  United  States^ 
and  practically  abolished  silver  as  money  by  failing  to  provide  for 
the  coinage  of  the  silver  dollar.  It  was  not  discussed,  as  shown  by 
the  Record,  and  neither  members  of  Congress  nor  the  people  under- 
stood the  scope  of  the  legislation." — {Ibid.,  appendix,  page  197.) 

Senator  Bogy,  of  Missouri,  uttered  the  following  words  in  a  speech, 
made  in  the  Senate  June  27,  1876: 

''  Why  the  act  of  1873,  which  forbids  the  coinage  of  the  silver 
dollar  was  passed  no  one  at  this  day  can  give  a  good  reason." — {Con- 
gressional Record,  volume  4,  part  5,  Forty-fourth  Congress,  first  ses- 
sion, page  4178.) 

Mr.  Burchard,  of  Illinois,  in  a  speech  made  in  the  House  of  Rep- 
resentatives on  July  13,  1876,  said: 

"The  coinage  act  of  1873,  unaccompanied  by  any  written  report 
upon  the  subject  from  any  committee,  and  unknown  to  the  member* 
ot  Congress  who,  without  opposition  allowed  it  to  pass  under  the  be- 
lief, if  not  assurance,  that  it  made  no  alteration  in  the  value  of  the 
current  coins,  changed  the  unit  of  value  from  silver  to  gold." — {Ibid.y 
page  4560.) 

Senator  Conkling,  in  the  Senate,  March  30,  1876,  during  the 
remarks  of  Senator  Bogy  on  the  bill  (S.  263)  to  amend  the  laws  re- 
lating to  the  legal-tender  of  silver  coin^  in  surprise,  inquired  : 

"  Will  the  Senator  allow  me  to  ask  him  or  some  other  Senator  a 
question?  Is  it  true  that  there  is  now  by  law  no  American  dollar? 
And,  if  so,  is  it  true  that  the  effect  of  this  bill  is  to  be  to  make  half- 
dollars  and  quarter-dollars  the  only  silver  coin  which  can  be  used  as- 
a  legal  tender?" 


35 

The  reply  of  Mr.  Sherman  to  this  question  of  Mr.  Conkling  is  most 
remarkable,  as  coming  from  the  chairman  of  the  Finance  Committee. 

Mr.  Sherman  said  :  "  I  will  answer  the  Senator  from  New  York, 
that  since  1853  the  use  of  the  silver  whole  dollar  has  been  discon- 
tinued, and  none  has  been  issued.     That  has  been  so  since  1853." 

Mr.  Conkling  insisting  on  knowing  ifit  was  really  true  that  there  was 
''noiv  by  law  no  American  dollar,*'  asked  if  there  was  power  to  issue  it? 

Mr.  Sherman  replied :  There  is  no  power,  and  has  been  none. 

Mr.  Bogy.  The  power  to  issue  existed  from  1853  to  1873,  but 
since  1873  I  think  there  has  been  no  power. 

Mr.  Sherman.  ''There  has  been  no  silver  dollar  issued  since  1853, 
and  my  impression  is  that  the  law  of  1853  did  not  confer  the  power, 
but  the  law  of  1873  cut  off  the  power,  in  my  judgment,  if  it  existed." 

"  If  it  existed,"  said  Mr.  Sherman,  who  did  not  seem  to  know 
whether  the  right  to  coin  silver  had  existed  in  the  United  States 
since  1853  or  not ;  while  the  fact  is  over  ^2,500,000  standard  dol- 
lars were  coined  at  our  mints  from  1871  to  1873. 

Mr.  Jones,  of  Nevada,  answered  Mr.  Conkling's  question  as  follows : 

"  Mr.  Jones,  of  Nevada.  The  law  of  1853  authorized  the  coinage 
of  the  silver  dollar,  and  it  was  never  demonetized  until  February, 
1873;  but  it  needed  no  law  to  prevent  people  from  coining  such  a 
dollar  for  use  in  business,  when  there  was  another  dollar  to  be  got 
three  or  four  per  cent,  cheaper.  The  people*did  in  1853  and  up  to 
1873  have  an  option  that  if  gold  should  become  dearer  they  could 
fall  back  on  the  silver  dollar.  In  1873  that  privilege  was  taken 
away." — (See  Congressional  Record,  volume  4,  part  3,  Forty-fourth 
Congress,  first  session.) 

On  the  25th  of  April  of  this  same  year,  Mr.  Sherman  made  another 
statement  respecting  the  effect  of  the  act  of  1873,  which,  when 
placed  side  by  side  with  what  he  said  on  the  30th  of  March,  reads 
very  strangely,  and  it  becomes  unaccountable  after  the  answer 
which  Senator  Jones  made  to  Mr.  Sherman's  statement  on  March 
30th,  abore  quoted.  The  following  is  what  the  Record  shows  Mr. 
Sherman  to  have  said  April  25,  only  twenty-six  days  after  his 
statement  given  above  : 

"  The  act  of  1873  did  not  in  the  slightest  degree  demonetize 
silver.  *  *  *  The  right  to  coin  the  silver  dollar,  which  is  now 
proposed  to  be  authorized  again,  has  always  existed  in  this  country  ; 
has  never  been  taken  away.  It  is  the  legal  dollar  to-day,  and  the 
silver  dollars  that  are  now  outstanding  are  a  legal-tender  for  all 
amounts,  unless  the  legal-tender  has  been  taken  away  by  the  Re- 
vised Statutes.  *  *  *  The  act  of  1873  simply  leaves  the  old 
dollar  where  the  law  of  1853  left  it.     It  says  nothing  about  it." 


36 

Did  Mr.  Sherman  know  the  real  facts  about  thfi  standard  dollar 
or  did  he  not?  If  he  did,  what  could  have  been  his  motive  for  these 
widely  different  statements  ?  If  he  did  not,  what  is  to  be  said  of  this 
exhibition  on  the  part  of  the  chairman  of  the  Finance  Committee? 

Mr.  Bright,  of  Tennessee,  said  of  the  law  : 

"  It  passed  by  fraud  in  the  House,  never  having  been  printed  in  ad- 
vance, being  a  substitute  for  the  printed  bill  ;  never  having  been  read 
at  the  clerk's  desk,  the  reading  having  been  dispensed  with  by  an 
impression  that  the  bill  made  no  material  alteration  in  the  coinage 
laws;  it  was  passed  without  discussion,  debate  being  cut  off  by  op- 
eration of  the  previous  question.  It  was  passed,  to  my  certain  in- 
formation, under  such  circumstances  that  the  fraud  escaped  the 
attention  of  some  of  the  most  watchful  as  well  as  the  ablest  statesmen 
in  Congress  at  the  time.     *     *     *      *      *     *     *     ^y.^  gj^.^  ^^  ^g^g  g^ 

fraud  that  smells  to  heaven.  It  was  a  fraud  that  will  stink  in  the 
nose  of  posterity,  and  for  which  some  persons  must  give  account 
in  the  day  of  retribution." — {Record,  vol.  7,  part  1,  second  session. 
Forty-fifth  Congress,  page  584.) 

General  Garfield,  in  a  speech  made  at  Springfield,  Ohio,  during 
the  fall  of  1877,  said  : 

''  Perhaps  I  ought  to  be  ashamed  to  say  so,  but  it  is  the  trutb  to 
say  that,  1  at  that  time  being  chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Appro- 
priations, and  having  my  hands  overfull  during  all  that  time  with 
work,  I  never  read  th^bill.  I  took  it  upon  the  faith  of  a  prominent 
Democrat  and  a  prominent  Republican,  and  I  do  not  know  that  I 
voted  at  all.  There  was  no  call  of  the  yeas  and  nays,  and  nobody 
opposed  that  bill  that  I  know  of.  It  was  put  through  as  dozens  of 
bills  are,  as  my  friend  and  I  know,  in  Congress,  on  the  faith  of  the 
report  of  the  chairman  of  the  committee  ;  therefore  I  tell  you,  be- 
cause it  is  the  truth,  that  I  have  no  knowledge  about  it." 

Senator  Allison,  on  February  15,  1878,  when  the  bill  (H.  R.  1093) 
to  authorize  the  free  coinage  of  the  silver  dollar  was  under  con- 
sideration, said  : 

*'  But  when  the  secret  history  of  this  bill  of  1873  comes  to  be  told, 
it  will  disclose  the  fact  that  the  House  of  Representatives  intended 
to  coin  both  gold  and  silver,  and  intended  to  place  both  metals  upon 
the  French  relation  instead  of  on  our  own,  which  was  the  true  scien- 
tific position  with  reference  to  this  subject  in  1873,  but  that  the  bill 
afterward  was  doctored,  if  I  may  use  the  term,  and  I  use  it  in  no 
offensive  sense  of  course " 

Mr.  Sargent  interrupted  him  and  asked  him  what  he  meant  by  the 
word  "  doctored." 

Mr.  Allison  said: 

"  I  said  I  used  the  word  in  no  offensive  sense.  It  was  changed 
after  discussion,  and  the  dollar  of  420  grains  was  substituted  for  it." — 
{Congressional  Record,  volume  7,  part  2,  Forty-fifth  Congress,  second 
session,  page  1058.) 


.    37 

On  February  15,  1878,  during  the  consideration  of  the  bill  above 
referred  to,  the  following  colloquy  between  Senator  Blaine  and  Sen- 
ator Voorhees  took  place : 

"  Mr.  Voorhees.  I  want  to  ask  my  friend  from  Maine,  whom  I 
am  glad  to  designate  in  that  way,  whether  I  may  call  him  as  one 
more  witness  to  tlie  fact  that  it  was  not  generally  known  whether 
silver  was  demonetized.  Did  he  know,  as  Speaker  of  the  House, 
presiding  at  that  time,  that  the  silver  dollar  was  demonetized  in  the 
bill  to  which  he  alludes  ?  " 

"  Mr.  Blaine.  I  did  not  know  anything  that  was  in  the  bill  at 
all.  As  I  have  before  said,  little  was  known  or  cared  on  the  subject. 
[Laughter.]  And  now  I  should  like  to  exchange  questions  with  the 
Senator  from  Indiana,  who  was  then  on  the  floor  and  whose  business 
it  was,  far  more  than  mine,  to  know,  because  by  the  designation  of 
the  House  I  was  to  put  questions  ;  the  Senator  from  Indiana,  then 
on  the  floor  of  the  House,  with  his  power  as  a  debater,  was  to  unfold 
them  to  the  House.     Did  he  know?" 

"Mr.  Voorhees.  I  very  frankly  say  that  I  did  not.*' — (Ibid., 
page  1063.) 

Senator  Beck,  in  a  speech  made  in  the  Senate  January  10,  1878, 
said : 

''  It  [the  bill  demonetizing  silver]  never  was  understood  by  either 
House  of  Congress.  I  say  that  with  full  knowledge  of  the  facts. 
!No  newspaper  reporter — and  they  are  the  most  vigilant  men  I  ever 
saw  in  obtaining  information — discovered  that  it  had  been  done." — 
(Congressional  liecord,  volume  7,  part  1,  Forty-fifth  Congress,  second 
session,  page  260.) 

Senator  Hereford,  in  the  Senate,  on  February  13,  1878,  in  discuss- 
ing the  demonetization  of  silver,  said  : 

"So  that  I  say  that  beyond  the  possibility  of  a  doubt  (and  there  is  no 
disputing  it)  that  bill  which  demonetized  silver,  as  it  passed,  never 
was  read,  never  was  discussed,  and  that  the  chairman  of  the  com- 
jnittee  who  reported  it,  who  offered  the  substitute,  said  to  Mr.  Hol- 
man,  when  inquired  of,  that  it  did  not  affect  the  coinage  in  any  way 
whatever." — (Ibid.,  page  989.) 

Senator  Howe,  in  a  speech  delivered  in  the  Senate  on  February  5, 
1878,  said  : 

"Mr.  President,  I  do  not  regard  the  demonetization  of  silver  as 
an  attempt  to  wrench  from  the  people  more  than  they  agreed  to  pay. 
That  is  not  the  crime  of  which  I  accuse  the  act  of  1873.  I  charge 
it  with  guilt  compared  with  which  the  robbery  of  two  hundred  mill- 
ions is  venial." — (Congressional  Becord,  volume  7,  part  1,  Forty-fifth 
Congress,  second  session,  page  764.) 

Mr.  Thurman  said : 

"I  can  not  say  what  took  place  in  the  House,  but  I  know, when  the 
bill  was  pending  in  the  Senate,  we  thought  it  was  simply  a  bill  to  re- 


38    • 

form  the  mint,  regulate  coinage,  and  fix  up  one  thing  and  another, 
and  there  is  not  a  single  man  in  the  Senate,  I  think,  unless  a  mem- 
ber of  the  committee  from  which  the  bill  came,  who  had  the  slightest 
idea  that  it  was  even  a  squint  toward  demonetization." 

Senator  Hoar,  in  1874,  then  a  member  of  the  House,  offered  the  fol- 
lowing amendment  to  a  bill  then  pending  in  that  body,  which  indi- 
cates that  he  was  not  at  that  time  aware  that  silver  was  no  longer 
available  as  legal-tender  money  : 

"That  from  and  after  the  first  day  of  September,  1874,  nothing 
but  gold  and  silver  coins  of  the  United  States  shall  be  a  legal-tender 
in  the  payment  of  any  debt  thereafter  contracted." 

President  Grant  who  signed  the  law  was  also  evidently  ignorant 
of  the  fact  that  it  demonetized  silver,  for  eight  months  after  the 
passage  of  the  bill  he  wrote  a  letter  to  Mr.  Cowdrey,  from  which 
the  following  extract  is  taken : 

"The  panic  has  brought  greenbacks  about  to  a  par  with  silver. 
1  wonder  that  silver  is  not  already  coming  into  the  market  to  supply 
the  deficiency  in  the  circulating  medium.  When  it  does  come,  and 
I  predict  that  it  will  soon,  we  will  have  made  a  rapid  stride  towards 
specie  payments.  Currency  will  never  go  below  silver  after  that. 
The  circulation  of  silver  will  have  other  beneficial  effects.  Experi- 
ence has  proved  that  its  takes  about  forty  millions  of  fractional  cur- 
rency to  make  small  change  necessary  for  the  transaction  of  the  busi- 
ness of  the  country.  Silver  will  gradually  take  the  place  of  this 
currency,  and,  further,  will  become  the  standard  of  values  which 
will  be  hoarded  in  a  small  way.  I  estimate  that  this  will  consume 
from  two  to  three  hundred  millions,  in  time,  of  this  species  of  our 
circulating  medium.  It  will  leave  the  paper  currency  free  to  per- 
form the  legitimate  functions  of  trade  and  will  tend  to  bring  us  back 
where  we  must  come  at  last,  to  a  specie  basis.  I  confess  to  a  desire 
to  see  a  limited  hoarding  of  money.  It  insures  a  firm  foundation  in 
time  of  need.  But  I  want  to  see  the  hoarding  of  something  that  has  a 
standard  of  value  the  world  over.  Silver  has  this,  and  if  we  once  get 
back  to  that  our  strides  toward  a  higher  appreciation  of  our  currency 
will  be  rapid.  Our  mines  are  now  producing  almost  unlimited 
amounts  of  silver,  and  it  is  becoming  a  question,  '  What  shall  we  do 
with  it?'  I  suggest  here  a  solution  that  will  answer  for  some  years, 
and  suggest  to  you  bankers  whether  you  may  not  imitate  it :  To  put  it 
in  circulation  now  ;  keep  it  there  until  it  is  fixed,  and  then  we  will 
find  other  markets." — {31cPherson  s  Hand-Booh  of  Politics  for  1874, 
pages  134  and  135.) 

On  January  14,  1875,  the  same  date  that  he  signed  the  resump- 
tion act.  President  Grant  sent  a  special  message  to  Congress  advis- 
ing the  establishment  of  two  or  more  mints  at  Chicago,  St.  Louis, 
and  Omaha  to  coin  silver  dollars  to  provide  for  resumption. 


39 

In  this  message  General  Grant  said:  "with  the  present  facilities 
for  coinage  it  would  take  a  period  probably  beyond  that  fixed  by 
Jaw  for  final  specie  resumption  to  coin  the  silver  necessary  to  trans- 
act the  business  of  the  country." 

These  quotations  show  conclusively  that  knowledge  of  the  real 
scop/C  and  eftect  of  the  act  was  confined  to  very  few,  if  indeed  any 
member  of  either  House  fully  understood  the  measure,  and  mani- 
festly not  one  at  all  comprehended  its  necessary  economic  effect.* 

On  its  face  the  act  related  only  to  the  Mint,  and  there  was  cer- 
tainly nothing  to  indicate  to  the  country  that  its  real  purpose  was  to 
change  the  money  standard.  In  this  view  of  it,  the  act  was  clearly 
a  fraud  upon  the  people,  or,  as  Mr.  Holman  characterized  it,  "a 
colossal  swindle." 

It  has  been  claimed  that  the  demonetization  of  silver  was  not  fully 
accomplished  till  the  adoption  of  the  Revised  Statutes,  June,  1874. 
But  a  careful  analysis  of  tlie  act  of  1873,  as  it  finally  passed  Con- 
gress, shows  that  silver  was  effectually  demonetized  by  this  act.  It 
is  true,  however,  that  until  the  adoption  of  the  Revised  Statutes, 
standard  silver  dollars,  if  any  existed,  were  an  unlimited  legal-tender, 
but  there  were  so  few  of  these  coins  in  existence  that  this  fact  was 
of  little  practical  value. 

The  only  claimant  to  the  authorship  of  the  act  of  1873  known  is 
Mr.  John  Jay  Knox,  formerly  Deputy  Comptroller  and  Comptroller 
of  the  Currency.  He  claims  to  have  inspired  the  report  of  the  Secre- 
tary of  the  Treasury  in  which  he  recommended  the  change  in  our 
silver  coins.  Where  Mr.  Knox  got  his  inspiration  does  not  appear. 
The  following  correspondence  between  Mr,  Knox  and  the  chairman 
of  the  National  Silver  Committee  may  help  to  explain  the  true  in- 
i?vardness  of  this  most  memorable  act : 

*'  The  National  Bank  op  the  Republic, 

"  CoR.  Wall  Street  and  Broadway, 

''  New  York,  April  8,  1890. 
'*'  Hon.  A.  J.  Warner. 

"  Dear  Sir:  In  a  leaflet  recently  printed  over  your  signature  you 
say:  '  Wipe  out  the  crime  of  1873  by  which  the  money  sflfendard 
was  unjustly  increased,'  etc.,  etc. 

''  As  I  v/as  the  author  of  the  act  of  1870,  which  subsequently  be- 


*  Of  so  little  importance  was  this  act  thoup:ht  to  be  at  the  time  that  Mr.  McPher- 
80n,  although  giving  the  votes  on  National  bank  and  currency  laws,  did  not  even 
mention  this  act  in  his  Hand-Book  of  1874,  and  but  briefly  referred  to  it  in  1876, 
after  the  question  came  again  under  discus-ion,  and  not  till  this  year,  1890,  was 
^t  deemed  of  sufficient  importance  to  hold  a  prominent  place  in  the  Hand-Book. 


40 

came  the  law  of  18*73,  or  at  least  of  that  sectioM  which  discontinued 
the  coinage  of  silver  dollars,  1  respectfully  request  that  you  will  ia- 
form  me  what  you  mean  by  the  '  crime  of  1873,'  and  oblige, 

''  Yours  truly, 

"  John  Jay  Knox." 


"  Marietta,  0.,  April  12,  1890. 
"  Hon.  John  Jay  Knox,  President  National  Bank  of  the  Republic,  Ne%(^ 

York  City. 

"  Dear  Sir:  I  beg  to  acknowledge  the  receipt  of  your  letter  of  Aprit 
8,  in  which  you  state  that  you  were  the  author  of  the  act  of  1870,. 
which  subsequently  became  the  law  of  1873,  or  that  part  of  it  whick 
demonetized  silver,  and  ask  what  I  mean  by  referring  to  that  act  afr 
the  'crime  of  1873.' 

"  An  aggravated  offense  againstthepublicwelfare,or  a  great  wrong 
to  society,  is  rightly,!  think,  classed  as  a  public  crime  ;  and  certainly 
an  act  that  compasses  public  robbery  can  hardly  be  spoken  of  other- 
wise than  as  a  crime.  Such  acts  may  be  the  result  of  blunders,  but 
the  acts  themselves  are  rightly  referred  to  as  crimes.  Blunders  are 
said  sometimes  to  be  worse  than  crimes,  but  without  the  intent  they 
do  not,  of  course,  come  within  the  legal  or  technical  definition  of 
cr}*ie. 

''  The  act  of  1873  changed  the  money  standard  of  the  country  from 
gold  and  silver  to  gold  alone.  Every  coin  debt  that  existed  at  that 
time  was  legally  and  equitably  payable  according  to  the  bi-metallic 
standard,  and  in  coin  of  either  metal.  The  act  of  1873,  changing  the 
standard  to  gold  alone,  changed  it  in  the  interest  of  creditor  nations 
and  of  credit  holders  and  against  debtors.  The  direct  and  necessary 
effect  of  the  act  demonetizing  silver  was  to  increase  the  value  of  gold, 
thus  making  the  gold  standard  itself  a  very  different  standard  from 
the  gold  standard  as  it  existed  with  silver  possessing  equal  mintage 
rights  and  legal- tender  power  with  gold.  This  increase  in  the  stand- 
ard was  made  to  apply  to  all  debts,  national,  state,  municipal  and 
private. 

*•  Now,  I  submit  that  the  annals  of  mankind  do  not  afford  an  ex- 
ample of  greater  public  wrong  and  injustice  than  the  act  demonetiz- 
ing silver  and  thus  changing  the  standard  of  value  in  favor  of  one 
class  and  against  another.  The  effect  has  been  the  spoliation  of  one^ 
third  of  the  assessable  value  of  all  property  for  the  benefit  of  the 
credit-holding  classes.  Under  this  act  the  value  of  gold  has  appre- 
ciated 50  per  cent.,  and  prices  have  fallen  33  per  cent. 

"  Now,  what  is  the  justification  of  this  change  in  the  money  stand- 
ard ?  When  it  took  place  we  had  not  yet  begun  to  pay  our  vast  war 
debt — a  debt  created  mostly  by  a  paper  scale  far  below  the  level  of 
the  metals.  Under  those  circumstances  to  change  the  metallic  scale^ 
as  ordinary  people  now  look  upon  it,  was  not  merely  a  piece  of  in- 
sane legislation,  but  a  gigantic  fraud,  involving  the  most  rank  in- 


41 

justice.  I  have  elsewhere  publicly  said  that  '  I  did  not  believe  it 
was  in  the  power  of  human  ingenuity,  ])rompted  by  the  most  malev- 
olent greed,  to  devise  a  measure  involving  more  widespread  and  far- 
reaching  injustice  and  wrong  to  mankind  than  the  measure  that  de- 
monetized silver.'  I  see  no  reason  to  take  back  or  modify  this  state- 
ment. If  governments  may,  with  impunity,  alter  money  standards 
where  vast  interests,  rights,  and  equities  are  involved^  against  either 
creditor  or  debtor,  then  no  rights  are  secure.  In  my  judgment 
such  acts  are  rightly  classed  as  high  crimes.  So  much  for  the  charac- 
terization of  the  act  of  1873. 

"Now,  as  to  its  author.  You  put  forth  the  claim  that  you  are  en- 
titled to  be 

*    *    *    <  ^y  merit  raised 
To  that  bad  eminence.'    *    *    * 

* '  I  have  not  been  disposed  to  lay  the  blame  for  this  act  on  any  single 
American  citizen,  nor  do  I  now  believe,  notwithstanding  the  claim 
you  put  forward  to  this  questionable  distinction,  that  any  man  ia 
public  life  in  the  United  States  had  any  adequate  comprehension  of 
the  far-reaching  and  insidious  consequences  which  have  emanated 
from  this  act.  I  am  aware  of  the  claim  you  put  forth  in  your  reply 
to  Mr.  Delmar  in  1885,  and  I  have  heretofore  carefully  searched  the 
Congressional  records  for  all  they  contained  on  the  question.  I  have 
also  heard  many  of  our  most  eminent  public  men  talk  on  the  subject. 
I  heard  what  Judge  Kelley,  chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Coinage^ 
in  1872,  said  in  Congress  as  to  the  part  he  took,  and  called  Mr. 
Garfield,  Mr.  Blaine,  and  others  as  witnesses. 

''  I  doubt  not  you  knew  that  the  words  demonetizing  silver  were  in- 
cluded in  the  sixty-seven  sections  of  the  coinage  law,  (which  few  of 
those  who  voted  for  the  bill  seemed  to  understand)  but  I  never  be- 
lieved that  you  comprehended  the  consequences  of  such  a  change 
in  our  monetary  system  ;  nor  do  you  yet  seem  to  fully  comprehend 
its  enormity.  Somebody,  of  course,  did  know;  somebody  did  devise- 
the  act  of  1873,  and  did  foresee  that  it  would  work  the  spoliation  it 
was  intended  to.  It  was  not  an  accident;  accidents  of  that  kind- 
never  happen.  But  he  or  they  who  devised  the  plan  of  silver  de- 
monetization for  Germany  and  the  United  States  understood  the 
philosophy  of  money.  He  or  they  were  evidently  men  familiar  with 
the  teachings  of  Ricardo,  Mill  and  Overstone.  But  that  any  man. 
in  public  life  in  the  United  States  at  that  time  understood  the  ques- 
tion well  enough  to  purposely  devise  such  a  scheme,  I  very  much 
doubt.  The  truth  is  that  at  that  time  there  was  very  little  knowl- 
edge of  monetary  science  in  this  country.  Little  was  known  even, 
of  the  monetary  literature  that  existed,  and  this  fact  was  well  knowrb 
on  the  other  side  of  the  ocean.  Silver  was  demonetized  under  the 
delusion  that  gold  constituted  an  invariable  standard,  'the  impos- 
ture of  an  invariable  gold  yard-stick  '  did  the  mischief.  Mr.  Sher- 
man, in  a  public  speech  years  afterwards,  said  that  gold  never  changed) 
in   value — *'*It   was    fixed   as   the   sun.'      That   yourself  and    Dr^ 


42 

Xinderman  were  used  as  instruments  to  procure  this  nefarious  legisla- 
tion, I  have  never  doubted.  The  absurd  claims  respecting  the  trade- 
dollar  (which  was  introduced  to  cover  up  the  withdrawal  of  the  stand- 
ard legal-tender  dollar)^  that  if  the  dollar  piece  was  made  a  little 
larger  we  could  get  more  per  ounce  for  our  silver  in  foreign  coun- 
tries illustrates  what  was  going  on  at  the  time  this  legislation  was 
being  concocted,  and  how  little  the  money  question  was  understood. 

"  What  was  there,  pray,  in  the  situation  as  far  back  as  1870  that 
should  have  led  a  patriotic  American  to  propose  the  demonetization 
of  silver  ?  Such  a  measure  was  certainly  not  called  for  by  the  peo- 
ple, and  not  one  in  a  million  of  the  people  in  this  country  knew  of 
the  act  till  long  after  its  passage.  Did  you  or  did  you  not  know  at 
the  time  that  the  demonetization  of  silver  would  increase  the  value 
of  gold  the  world  over  and  add  enormously  to  our  debt  burden  ? 
That  is  the  question. 

"I  think  the  Hon.  Thomas  Fitch,  at  the  St.  Louis  Silver  Conven- 
tion, correctly  represented  the  situation  when  he  said: 

"'In  this  transaction  England  appeared  as  the  bunco-steerer  of 
the  world  and  Uncle  Sara  the  gentleman  from  the  rural  districts.' 

•'Therefore,  in  my  judgment,  the  act  of  1873  has  never  been  too 
severely  denounced  as  an  act  involving  the  grossest  injustice,  and 
therefore  in  the  nature  of  a  public  crime.  I  have,  however,  never 
charged  any  American  citizen  with  deliberate  intent  to  commit  a 
crime  by  devising  or  foisting  this  act  upon  the  people,  knowing 
what  its  consequences  would  be,  nor  am  I  able  to  comprehend  the 
moral  sense  of  one  who  comes  forward  to  claim  the  authorship  of 
such  a  measure.  Would  you  really  have  us  understand  that  you 
did  deliberately  and  purposely  devise  this  scheme  to  change  the 
standard  of  value  and  at  the  same  time  compel  all  debtors,  the  pub- 
lic included,  to  pay  debts  created  on  a  paper  or  coin  basis,  according 
to  the  increased  and  constantly-increasing  gold  standard,  and  that, 
too,  when  the  national  debt  aggregated  nearly  $3,000,000,000  ?  To 
me  such  an  act  stands  in  the  same  category  with  piracy  and  other 
forms  of  deliberate  spoliation. 

"  Nor  is  the  wrong  done  to  debtors  the  onl}''  evil  wrought  by  this 
act.  It  has  forced  the  constant  adjustment  of  all  industrial  opera- 
tions to  an  ever-appreciating  standard  of  value,  producing  endless 
l)ankruptcies,  forcing  idleness  with  attending  strikes,  and  causing 
more  and  greater  wrongs  and  misery  than  any  other  cause  s^nce  the 
war,  if  not  more  than  the  war  itself. 

"  I  do  not  believe  that  you  knowingly  devised  any  such  thing,  but 
were  simply  made  one  of  the  instruments  by  which  this  wrong  was 
perpetrated.  I  am,  therefore,  I  think  more  charitable  to  you  than 
jyou  are  to  yourself. 

"I  am,  very  respectfullv  vours, 

''A.  J.  Warner." 


CHAPTER  IV. 


The  Bland-Allison  Act  of  1878. 

The  passage  of  the  Resumption  Act,  June  14,  1875,  awakened 
new  interest  in  the  financial  question  throughout  the  country.  The 
act  of  1873  had  been  vigorously  assailed,  and  although  as  yet  the 
great  mass  of  the  people  had  not  learned  that  silver  had  been  de- 
monetized, an  active  inquiry  was  aroused  which  led  to  discussions 
in  Congress,  followed  by  various  bills  intended  to  remedy  the  wrong 
done  by  that  act. 

On  the  15th  of  August,  1876,  a  resolution  was  passed  by  Congress 
providing  for  a  commission  to  inquire — 

First.  Into  the  change  which  has  taken  place  in  the  relative  value 
of  gold  and  silver  ;  the  causes  thereof,  whether  permanent  or  other- 
wise ;  the  efiects  thereof  upon  trade,  commerce,  finance  and  the  pro- 
ductive interests  of  the  country,  and  upon  the  standard  of  value  in 
this  and  foreign  countries. 

Second.  Into  the  policy  of  the  restoration  of  the  double  standard 
in  this  country;  and,  if  restored,  what  the  legal  relation  between  the 
two  coins,  silver  and  gold,  should  be  ; 

Third.  Into  the  policy  of  continuing  legal-tender  notes  concur- 
rently with  the  metallic  standards,  and  the  effects  thereof  upon  the 
labor,  industries  and  wealth  of  the  country  ;  and 

Fourth.  Into  the  best  means  for  providing  for  facilitating  the  re- 
sumption of  specie  payments. 

The  commission  consisted  of  Messrs.  John  P.  Jones,  Lewis  V. 
Bogy  and  George  S.  Boutwell,  of  the  Senate  ;  Messrs.  Randall  L. 
Gibson,  George  Willard  and  Richard  P.  Bland,  of  the  House  ;  Hon. 
W.  S.  Groesbeck  and  Prof.  Francis  Bowen,  as  experts.  George  M. 
Weston  was  appointed  secretary. 

The  investigations  of  this  commission  were  thorough  and  exhaus- 
tive of  the  subject,  and  its  report  to  Congress  is  one  of  the  ablest 
ever  made  on  any  subject.  Every  phase  of  the  money  question  is  dis- 
cussed in  a  clear  and  lucid  style,  and  the  report  is  full  of  valuable 
information  on  the  subject.  In  fact,  this  report  has  become  a  sort 
■of  text-book  on  the  question  of  money.  Credit  for  the  report  is  due 
mainly  to  Senator  Jones,  of  Nevada,  and  Mr.  Weston,  the  Secretary. 


44 
Efforts  to  Kestore  Silver. 

On  the  27th  of  March,  1876,  Mr.  Keagan  moved  an  amendment  Ut 
a  pending  appropriation  bill,  providing  that  the  "  silver  coins  of  tke 
United  States  of  the  denomination  of  one  dollar  shall  be  legal-tender 
at  their  nominal  value  for  any  payment  not  exceeding  fifty  dollars." 
Silver  coins  smaller  than  one  dollar  were  to  be  legal-tender  for  twenty 
dollars. 

On  April  10,  Mr.  Sherman  reported  this  bill  from  the  Senate 
Finance  Committee,  amended  so  as  to  coin  a  silver  dollar  of  412,8 
grains,  to  contain  devices  readily  distinguishable  from  the  trade- 
dollar,  and  to  be  a  legal-tender  for  twenty  dollars,  but  not  to  be 
receivable  for  customs  dues  nor  interest  on  the  public  debt. 

Previous  to  this  date,  however,  a  desultory  discussion  had  taken 
place  in  the  Senate  over  a  bill  to  take  away  the  legal-tender  function 
from  the  trade-dollar,  from  which  quotations  were  made  in  the  pre- 
vious chapter.  This  discussion  threw  a  flood  of  light  on  the  situa- 
tion, and  brought  out  the  dark  portions  of  the  act  of  1873. 

On  the  20th  of  April,  an  amendment  proposed  by  Mr.  Sherman,  to 
coin  a  dollar  of  412.8  grains,*  to  be  a  legal-tender  for  twenty  dollars^ 
being  still  pending,  Mr.  Bogy  moved  to  strike  out  the  amendment, 
and  spoke  in  favor  of  the  free  coinage  of  both  metals  with  unlimited 
legal-tender. 

Senator  Jones,  of  Nevada,  followed  on  the  24th  and  25th  of  April, 
with  an  able  and  exhaustive  speech,  replete  with  argument  and 
extensively  quoting  authorities  in  favor  of  the  use  of  both  metals  as- 
money. 

From  this  discussion  began  a  general  movement  in  favor  of  the 
remonetization  of  silver  which  has  continued  to  grow  from  that  day 
to  this,  and  will,  no  doubt,  continue  till  silver  is  replaced  by  the  side 
of  gold  as  a  money  metal  with  equal  rights  of  mintage  and  legal-ten- 
der with  gold. 

June  10th,  1876,  Mr.  Cox,  of  New  York,  reported  in  the  House  a 
joint  resolution  providing  for  the  distribution  of  the  silver  coin  in  the 
Treasury.  When  this  resolution  went  to  the  Senate  it  was  amended 
(June  21st)  by  adding  section  2,  as  follows  : 

"  That  the  trade-dollar  shall  not  hereafter  be  a  legal-tender,  and 
the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  is  hereby  authorized  to  limit,  from  time- 

*The  reason  for  making  the  proposed  dollar  412.8  grains  when  the  old  dollar  con 
tained  412.5  grains  is  not  given,  but  it  was  doubtless  to  make  the  ratio  exactly  1 
to  1  instead  of  15.98+,  as  with  the  old  dollar. 


to  time,  the  coinage  thereof  to  such  an  amount  as  he  may  deem  suffi- 
cient to  meet  the  export  demand  for  the  same." 

This  amendment  passed  the  Senate,  but  was  rejected  in  the  House, 
when  Mr.  Landers  (June  28th)  moved  to  further  amend  the  bill,  as 
follows : 

'^  And  be  it  further  provided,  That  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury 
is  directed  to  authorize  the  coinage  of  the  standard  silver  dollar  of 
the  same  weight  and  fineness  in  use  January  1,  1861,  and  said  dol- 
lar shall  be  a  legal-tender  in  payment  of  all  debts,  public  and  pri- 
vate." 

This  amendment  was  agreed  to  in  the  House  by  yeas  110,  nays  55. 
The  Senate  disagreed  to  the  Landers'  amendment,  and  a  conference 
committee  was  appointed,  and  both  the  Landers  and  the  trade-dollar 
amendments  were  left  out,  and  the  bill  was  then  passed  July  13th. 

Meantime,  Mr.  Cox,  of  New  York,  had  reported  another  bill  from 
the  Banking  and  Currency  Committee  containing  the  same  pro- 
vision as  to  the  trade-dollar  that  was  contained  in  the  Senate  bill, 
which  bill  passed  the  House  and  went  to  the  Senate,  where  it  was 
called  up  June  27th,  and  a  substitute  offered  providing  again  for  a 
dollar  of  412.8  grains  to  be  a  legal-tender  for  $20,  and  also  taking 
from  the  trade-dollar  all  legal-tender  power. 

Mr.  Bogy,  June  28,  1876,  moved  to  strike  out  the  provision  limit- 
ing the  legal-tender  of  the  proposed  coin  to  $20,  which  was  carried 
by  18  to  14.  This  bill  finally  went  back  to  the  Committee  on 
Finance,  and  was  not  again  reported  to  the  Senate. 

July  24,  1876,  Mr.  Kelley  moved  to  suspend  the  rules  and  pass 
the  following  bill  in  the  House  : 

* '  A  bill  to  provide  for  the  coining  of  the  standard  silver  dollar  of 
the  United  States,  and  for  restoring  its  legal- tender  character." 

'*  Whereas,  By  the  omission  to  name  the  legal-tender  silver  dollar  in 
the  enumeration  of  silver  coins  of  the  United  States  in  the  act  of 
February  12,  1873,  the  authority  to  coin  said  dollar  was  withheld  ; 
therefore, 

"  Be  it  enacted,  etc.,  That  there  shall  be,  from  time  to  time,  struck 
and  coined  at  the  several  mints  of  the  United  States  silver  dollars  of  the 
weight  of  412^  grains,  as  provided  for  in  the  act  of  January  18,  1837, 
upon  which  shall  be  the  devices  and  legends  provided  by  said  act, 
and  that  the  said  dollar  shall  be  a  legal-tender  of  payment  for  any 
sums  whatever." 

The  vote  on  this  bill  was — yeas  119,  nays  66,  not  two-thirds,  and 
the  bill  did  not  pass.     Mr.  Kelley  had  become  by  this  time  fully 


40 

aware  of  his  mistake  in  connection  witja  the  act  of  1873,  which  he 
frankly  acknowledged,  and  proceeded,  as  an  honest  legislator,  to 
do  all  in  his  power  to  right  the  wrong. 

On  the  25th  of  July,  1875,  Mr.  Bland  introduced  a  bill  similar  to 
Mr.  Kelley's,  which  had  failed  to  pass  the  House  under  suspension 
of  the  rules  requiring  a  two-thirds  vote.  Other  bills  of  similar 
purport  were  also  introduced. 

At  the  next  session  of  Congress  (December  12,  1876,)  Mr.  Bland 
reported  from  the  Committee  on  Mines  and  Mining  the  following  as 
a  substitute  for  his  bill  (No.  3635)  : 

*'jBe  it  enacted,  etc.,  That  there  shall  be,  from  time  to  time,  coined 
at  the  mints  of  the  United  States  silver  dollars  of  the  weight  of  412^ 
grains  standard  silver  to  the  dollar,  as  provided  for  in  the  act  of 
January  18,  1837,  and  that  said  dollar  shall  be  a  legal-tender  for  all 
debts,  public  and  private,  except  where  payment  of  gold  coin  is 
required  by  law." 

On  the  following  day,  December  13,  1876,  notwithstanding  the 
vigorous  opposition  of  Mr.  Garfield  and  others,  the  bill  was  passed 
by  a  vote  of  167  to  53.  This  bill,  however,  was  not  taken  up  at  all 
in  the  Senate. 

November  5,  1877,  Mr.  Bland  moved  to  suspend  the  rules  and 
pass  the  following  bill  : 

''An  act  to  authorize  the  free  coinage  of  the  standard  silver  dollar, 
and  to  restore  its  legal-tender  character." 

"Be  it  enacted,  etc.,  That  there  shall  be  coined  at  the  several 
mints  of  the  United  States  silver  dollars  of  the  weight  of  412^  grains 
troy  of  standard  silver,  as  provided  in  the  act  of  January  18,  1837, 
on  which  shall  be  the  device  and  superscriptions  provided  by  said 
act ;  which  coins,  together  with  all  silver  dollars  heretofore  coined 
by  the  United  States  of  like  weight  and  fineness,  shall  be  a  legal- 
tender,  at  their  nominal  value,  for  all  debts  and  dues,  public  and 
private,  except  where  otherwise  provided  by  contract ;  and  any 
owner  of  silver  bullion  may  deposit  the  same  at  any  United  States 
coining-mint,  or  assay-office,  to  be  coined  into  such  dollars,  for  his 
benefit,  upon  the  same  terms  and  conditions  as  gold  bullion  is  de- 
])08ited  for  coinage  under  existing  laws. 

'*^Sec.  3.  All  acts  and  parts  of  acts  inconsistent  with  the  pro- 
visions of  this  act  are  hereby  repealed." 

The  rules  were  suspended  and  the  bill  was  passed  by  a  vote  of  164 
to  34  ;  the  negative  vote  being  almost  entirely  from  New  York  and 
New  England. 

The  bill  went  to  the  Senate  and  was  referred  to  the  Finance  Com- 
mittee.    November  21,  1877,  Mr.  Allison  reported  the  bill  from  the 


47 

Committee  on  Finance  to  the  Senate  with  an  amendment  striking: 
out  of  the  first  section,  the  last  clause,  commencing  "and  any  owner 
of  silver  huUion,"  etc.,  and  inserting  the  following,  which  changed 
the  act  from  free  coinage  to  the  purchase  of  bullion  for  coinage  on 
Government  account : 

"And  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  is  authorized  and  directed, 
out  of  any  money  in  the  Treasury  not  otherwise  appropriated,  to 
purchase,  from  time  to  time,  silver  bullion,  at  the  market  price 
thereof,  not  less  than  two  million  dollars  per  month,  nor  more  than 
four  million  dollars  per  month,  and  cause  the  same  to  be  coined 
monthly,  as  fast  as  so  purchased,  into  such  dollars.  And  any  gain 
or  seigniorage  arising  from  this  coinage  shall  be  accounted  for  and 
paid  into  the  Treasury,  as  provided  under  existing  laws  relative  to 
the  subsidiary  coinage  :  Provided^  That  the  amount  of  money  at  any 
one  time  invested  in  such  silver  bullion,  exclusive  of  such  resulting 
coin,  shall  not  exceed  five  million  dollars." 

Mr.  Morrill  ofiered  an  amendment  limiting  the  proportion  of  sil- 
ver that  should  be  receivable  for  duties.  This  amendment  was  re- 
jected by  46  to  21. 

Mr.  Wallace  moved  to  amend  so  as  to  require  one  hundred  mil- 
lion such  dollars  to  be  coined  in  the  next  three  years,  which  was  re- 
jected by  a  vote  of  26  yeas  to  41  nays. 

The  amendment  of  the  committee,  as  reported  by  Mr.  Allison,  was- 
then  agreed  to  by  49  to  22.  Mr.  Windom,  now  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury,  voted  for  the  amendment  and  for  the  bill. 

Mr.  Cameron,  of  Wisconsin,  moved  to  make  the  dollar  contain' 
420  grains_,  and  Mr.  Blaine  to  make  it  contain  425,  and  Mr.  Eaton  440' 
grains,  all  of  which  were  rejected. 

Mr.  Christiancy  moved  to  make  the  silver  dollar  redeemable  in 
gold,  for  which  there  were  14  votes. 

The  bill,  with  the  Allison  amendment,  passed  the  Senate  February 
15,  1878,  by  a  vote  of  48  to  21.  The  following  is  the  vote  against  the 
bill :  Nays — Messrs.  Anthony,  JBarnum,  Bayard,  Blaine,  Burnside, 
Christiancy,  Conkling,  Dawes,  Edmunds,  Hamlin,  Hoar,  Reman, 
Lamar,  McPherson,  Mitchell,  Morrill,  Randolph,  Rollins,  Sargent, 
Wadleigh,  Whijte*— 21. 

The  bill  came  up  in  the  House  February  21,  1878,  on  a  motion  to 
concur  in  the  Senate  amendments.  Mr.  A.  S.  Hewitt  moved  to  lay 
the  bill  and  amendments  on  the  table  ;  the  vote  on  thi-s  motion  was 
nays  205,  yeas  71.     On  concurring  in  the  Senate  amendment  to  strike 


*  Names  in  italics  are  Democrats. 


48 

out  of  the  House  bill  the  provisions  authorizing  any  owner  of  silver 
to  have  it  coined  for  his  benefit — free  coinage — and  to  substitute  the 
purchase  of  not  less  than  $2,000,000  nor  more  than  $4,000,000  worth 
of  bullion  each  month,  the  vote  stood  203  yeas  to  72  nays. 

The  amendment  of  the  Senate  providing  for  an  international  con- 
ference was  agreed  to  by  196  to  71.  The  other  amendments  were 
concurred  in  without  a  division,  andthe  bill  was  passed  and  went  to 
the  President. 

February  28,  President  Hayes  sent  to  the  House  a  message  veto- 
ing the  bill.  One  of  the  reasons  given  for  his  veto  was  that  "the 
right  to  pay  duties  in  silver  or  in  certificates  for  silver  deposits 
will,  when  they  are  issued  in  sufficient  amount  to  circulate,  put  an 
end  to  the  receipt  of  revenue  in  gold,  and  thus  compel  the  payment  of 
silver  for  both  the  principal  and  interest  of  the  public  debt." 

Foreign  opinion,  imported  through  foreign  banking  houses  in  New 
York,  has  dominated  the  money  centers  of  this  country,  controlled 
the  metropolitan  press,  and  dictated  our  financial  policy  ever  since 
the  war.  By  this  sentiment  all  our  Presidents,  by  whichever  party 
-elected,  seem  to  have  been  controlled  ;  and  certainly  in  this  respect 
Mr.  Hayes  was  no  exception.  Possessing  little  knowledge  of  mone- 
tary questions  himself  he  was  the  more  easily  controlled  by  what 
seemed  to  him  to  be  the  more  respectable  opinion  of  banking  circles. 
But  if  he  and  other  Presidents  since  had  indulged  more  cautiously  in 
prophecy  their  reputations  for  financial  foresight  would  have  sufiered 
less. 

The  bill  was  passed  over  the  President's  veto  the  same  day  the 
message  reached  the  House,  by  a  vote  of  196  to  73  in  the  House,  and 
by  46  to  19  in  the  Senate. — (See  Congressional  Record  of  February 
29,  for  the  vote  in  full.)     The  act  as  passed  is  as  follows  : 

* '  An  act  to  authorize  the  coinage  of  the  standard  silver  dollar j 
and  to  restore  its  legal-tender  character  : 

"Be  it  enacted,  That  there  shall  be  coined,  at  the  several  mints  of 
the  United  States,  silver  dollars  of  the  weight  of  412^  grains  troy 
of  standard  silver,  as  provided  in  the  act  of  January  18,  1837,  on 
which  shall  be  the  devices  and  superscriptions  provided  by  said 
act ;  which  coins  together  with  all  silver  dollars  heretofore  coined 
by  the  United  States,  of  like  weight  and  fineness,  shall  be  a  legal- 
tender,  at  their  nominal  value,  for  all  debts  and  dues  public  and 
private,  except  where  otherwise  expressly  stipulated  in  the  contract. 
And  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  is  authorized  and  directed  to  pur- 
chase, from  time  to  time,  silver  bullion,  at  the  market  price  thereof, 
not  less  than  two  million  dollars'  worth  per  month,  nor  more  thaa 


49 

four  million  dollars'  worth,  per  month,  and  cause  the  same  to  be 
coined  monthly,  as  fast  as  so  purchased,  into  such  dollars  ;  and  a 
sum  sufficient  to  carry  out  the  foregoing  provisions  of  this  act  is 
hereby  appropriated  out  of  any  money  in  the  Treasury  not  other- 
wise appropriated.  And  any  gain  or  seigniorage  arising  from  this 
coinage  shall  be  accounted  lor  and  paid  into  the  Treasury,  as  pro- 
vided under  the  existing  laws  relative  to  the  subsidiary  coinage  : 

"  Provided,  That  the  amount  of  money  at  any  one  time  invested 
in  such  silver  bullion,  exclusive  of  such  resulting  coin,  shall  not  ex- 
ceed five  million  dollars: 

^^  And  provided  further,  That  nothing  in  this  act  shall  be  con- 
strued to  authorize  the  payment  in  silver  of  certificates  of  deposit 
issued  under  the  provisions  of  section  two  hundred  and  fifty-four  of 
the  Revised  Statutes. 

''Sec.  2.  That  immediately  after  the  passage  of  this  act,  the 
President  shall  invite  the  governments  of  the  countries  composing 
the  Latin  Union,  so-called,  and  of  such  other  European  nations  as 
he  may  deem  advisable,  to  join  the  United  States  in  a  conference  to 
adopt  a  common  ratio  between  gold  and  silver,  for  the  purpose  of 
establishing,  internationally,  the  use  of  bi-metallic  money,  and  secur- 
ing fixity  of  relative  value  between  those  metals  ;  such  conference  to 
be  held  at  such  place,  in  Europe  or  in  the  United  States,  at  such 
time  within  six  months,  as  may  be  mutually  agreed  upon  by  the  exec- 
utives of  the  governments  joining  in  the  same,  whenever  the  gov- 
ernments so  invited,  or  any  three  of  them,  shall  have  signified  their 
willingness  to  unite  in  the  same. 

*'The  President  shall,  by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the 
Senate,  appoint  three  commissioners,  who  shall  attend  such  confer- 
ence on  behalf  of  the  United  States,  and  shall  report  the  doings 
thereof  to  the  President,  who  shall  transmit  the  same  to  Congress. 

"Said  commissioners  shall  each  receive  the  sum  of  two  thousand 
five  hundred  dollars  and  their  reasonable  expenses,  to  be  approved 
by  the  Secretary  of  State  ;  and  the  amount  necessary  to  pay  such 
compensation  and  expenses  is  hereby  appropriated  out  of  any  money 
in  the  Treasury  not  otherwise  appropriated. 

"Sec.  3.  That  any  holder  of  the  coin  authorized  by  this  act  may 
deposit  the  same  with  the  Treasurer  or  any  assistant  treasurer  of 
the  United  States,  in  sums  not  less  than  ten  dollars,  and  receive 
therefor  certificates  of  not  less  than  ten  dollars  each,  corresponding 
with  the  denominations  of  the  United  States  notes.  The  coin  de- 
posited for  or  representing  the  certificates  shall  be  retained  in  the 
Treasury  for  the  payment  of  the  same  on  demand.  Said  certificates 
shall  be  receivable  for  customs,  taxes,  and  all  public  dues,  and,  when 
80  received,  may  be  reissued. 

"Sec.  4.  All  acts  and  parts  of  acts  inconsistent  with  the  provis- 
ions of  this  act  are  hereby  repealed." 

Instead  of  restoring  silver  to  its  place  as  a  money  metal,  which  it  had 
held  from  earliest  times,  and  which  had  been  given  to  it  in  the  es- 


50 

tablishment  of  our  Governraentj  this  act  provided  merely  for  making 
money  out  of  silver ;  but  it  restored  the  le<:^al-tender  power  of  tlie  okl 
dollar  except  where  "  expressly  stipulated  in  the  contract,"  This 
exception  can  be  regarded  only  as  a  mistake.  The  highest  function 
of  money  is  to  serve  as  a  universal  equivalent  for  everything  else.  It 
is  a  medium  in  which  all  obligations  are  dischargeable.  There  is  no 
more  reason  why  this  exception  should  be  made  in  the  case  of  silver 
money  than  of  gold  money,  and  it  is  time  such  attempts  to  fix  an 
exclusive  gold  standard  upon  this  country  was  stopped. 

The  Constitution  makes  no  difference  between  the  two  kinds  of 
money,  and  there  should  be  none  in  the  laws. 

The  silver  ({ucstion  will  not  be  permanontl}''  settled  till  it  is  rightly 
settled,  and  it  will  not  be  rightly  settled  till  both  metals  are  placed 
u{)on  a  plane  of  absolute  equality  as  to  both  legal-tender  and  right 
of  mintage. 

During  the  pendency  of  the  act  of  1878  there  was  much  discus- 
sion relative  to  the  payment  of  customs'  dues,  and  the  principal  and 
interest  of  the  public  debt  in  silver. 

Mr.  Hayes,  in  his  veto  message,  seemed  over-solicitous  lest  silver 
might  be  used  in  the  payment  of  the  interest  or  principal  of  the  bonds. 

But  on  the  16th  of  January,  1878,  Stanley  Matthews,  then  Senator 
from  Ohio,  afterwards  associate  Justice  on  the  Supreme  Bench,  sub- 
mitted the  following  concurrent  resolution  : 

Tub  Matthews'  Resolution. 

''  Whereas,  By  the  act  entitled,  'An  act  to  strengthen  the  public 
credit,'  approved  March  18,  1809,  it  was  provided  and  declared  that 
the  faith  of  the  Uiiited  States  was  thereby  solemnly  pledged  to  the  pay- 
ment in  coin  or  its  equivalent  of  all  the  interest-bearing  obligations 
of  the  United  States,  except  in  cases  where  the  law  authorizing  the 
issue  of  such  obligations  had  expressly  provided  that  the  same  might 
be  paid  in  lawful  money  or  other  currency  than  gold  and  silver  ;  and 

"  Whereas,  All  the  bonds  of  the  United  States  authorized  to  be 
issued  by  the  act  entitled  'An  act  to  authorize  the  refunding  of  the 
national  debt,'  approved  July  14,  1870,  by  the  terms  of  said  act 
were  declared  to  be  redeemable  in  coin  of  the  then  present  standard 
value,  bearing  interest  payable  semi-annually  in  such  coin  ;  and 

"  Whereas,  All  bonds  of  the  United  States  authorized  to  be  issued 
under  the  act  entitled  'An  act  to  provide  for  the  resumption  of  specie 
payments,'  ap[)roved  January  14,  1875,  are  required  to  be  of  the 
description  of  bonds  of  the  United  States  described  in  the  said  act  of 
Congress  ajjproved  July  14,  1870,  entitled  '^An  act  to  authorize  the 
refunding  of  the  national  debt;'  and 

"Wiii^KKAS,  At  the  date  of  the  i)assage  of  said  act  of  Congress  last 
aforesaid,  to  wit,  the  fourteenth  day  of  July,  1870,  the  coin  of  the 


51 

United  States  of  standard  value  of  that  date  included  silver  dollars 
of  the  weight  of  412^  grains  each,  declared  by  the  act  approved  Jan- 
uary 18,  1837,  entitled  'An  act  supplementary  to  the  act  entitled  an 
act  establishing  a  mint  and  reguhiting  the  coins  of  the  United  States,' 
to  be  a  legal-tender  of  payment,  according  to  their  nominal  value 
for  any  suras  whatever  :  Therefore, 

'^Be  it  resolved  by  the  Senate  {the  House  of  Eepresentatives  con- 
cunnng  therein),  That  all  the  bonds  of  the  United  States  issued  or 
authorized  to  be  issued,  under  the  said  acts  of  Congress  hereinbefore 
recited  are  payable,  principal  and  interest,  at  the  option  of  the  Gov- 
ernment of  the  United  States,  in  silver  dollars,  of  the  coinage  of  the 
United  States,  containing  412^  grains  each  of  standard  silver  ;  and 
that  to  restore  to  its  coinage  such  silver  coins  as  a  legal-tender  in 
payment  of  said  bonds,  principal  and  interest,  is  not  in  violation  of 
the  public  faith  nor  in  derogation  of  the  rights  of  the  public  creditor." 

Mr.  Morrill  moved  to  refer  the  resolution  to  the  Judiciary  Com- 
mittee, which  was  supported  by  the  gold  men,  but  was  nut  agreed  to. 

Mr.  Conkling  then  moved  to  make  it  a  joint  resolution,  which 
would  require  the  signature  of  the  President.  This  was  not  agreed  to. 

Mr.  Edmunds  moved  to  strike  out  of  the  resolution  the  part  that 
made  silver  a  legal-tender  in  tlie  payment  of  the  bonds  and  to  provide 
for  their  payment  "  in  gold  or  its  equivalent,  and  that  any  other 
payment  without  the  consent  of  the  creditor  would  be  in  violation 
of  the  public  faith  and  in  derogation  of  his  rights."  This  was  dis- 
agreed to  by  48  to  18.  The  18  yeas  being  "  Messrs.  Anthony,  Bar- 
num,  Bayard,  Burnside,  Christiancy,  Conkling,  Dawes,  Eaton,  Ed- 
munds, Hamlin,  Kernan,  McPherson,  Mitchell,  Morrill,  Randolph, 
Rollins,  Sargent,  Wadleigh."— 18. 

Other  amendments  were  offered  and  rejected,  when  the  resolution 
passed  by  43  to  22 . 

Those  voting  against  the  resolution  were:  "Messrs.  Anthony, 
Barnum,  Bayard,  Blaine,  Burnside,  Christiancy,  Conkling,  Dawes, 
Eaton,^d.vawn^B,'R.Q,m\m, Kernan, Lamar , McPherson,M\i(i\\e\\,  Mor- 
rill, Paddock,  i?a%t/o?p^,  Rollins,  Sargent,  Wadleigh,  Windom." — 22. 

Mr.  Edmunds  then  moved  to  amend  the  preamble  so  as  to  change 
the  resolution  into  one  declaring  for  gold  payment  of  the  bonds, 
which  was  rejected,  and  the  resolution  went  to  the  House,  where,  on 
the  29th  of  January  it  passed,  as  it  came  from  the  Senate,  by  a  vote 
of  189  yeas  to  79  nays. 

Thus  the  Forty-fifth  Congress,  previous  to  the  passage  of  the  Bland- 
Allison  act,  had  declared  that  to  pay  the  public  debt  in  silver  coin  was 
not  in  derogation  of  the  rights  of  any  creditor,  and  prepared  the  way 
for  the  act  already  given,  which  followed  on  the  28th  of  February 
of  the  same  year. 


CHAPTER  V. 


Period  from  1878  to  1890. 

The  act  of  1878  was  nowhere  accepted  as  a  final  settlement  of 
the  silver  question,  and  the  next  Congress  took  up  the  question 
again  as  though  no  act  had  passed.  In  the  extra  session  of  the  Forty- 
aixth  Congress,  Mr.  Warner,  of  Ohio,  introduced  a  bill  amending 
section  3511  of  the  Revised  Statutes  so  as  to  read  as  follows: 

"The  gold  coins  of  the  United  States  shall  be  a  dollar  or  unit," 
etc. 

Also  amending  section  3513  of  the  Revised  Statutes  so  as  to  make 
it  read : 

"The  silver  coins  of  the'United  States  shall  be  a  dollar,  or  unit," 
etc.,  thus  restoring  the  unit  to  both  metals. 

Also  to  amend  section  3520  of  the  Revised  Statutes  so  as  to  make 
it  read: 

"  Any  owner  of  silver  bullion  may  deposit  the  same  at  any  mint, 
to  be  formed  into  bars  or  into  standard  dollars  of  the  weight  of  412^ 
grains  troy,  for  his  benefit,"  etc.,  thus  restoring  unlimited  coinage. 

Also  section  3585  so  as  to  make  it  read: 

"The  gold  coins  of  the  United  States  and  standard  silver  dollars 
shall  be  a  legal-tender  in  all  payments,"  etc.,  thus  restoring  to  silver 
full  legal-tender  power  the  same  as  gold. 

On  the  30th  of  April,  1879,  Mr.  Warner,  from  the  Committee  on 
Coinage,  Weights  and  Measures,  reported  the  bill  to  the  House. 
The  bill  was  discussed  at  length,  and  its  progress  through  the  House 
was  stubbornly  resisted,  some  twenty  yea  and  nay  votes  being  had 
on  various  amendments  and  propositions.  The  bill  finally  passed 
the  House  May  24,  1879,  by  114  yeas  to  97  nays.  All  of  those  voting 
for  the  bill  were  Democrats  or  Greenbackers,  except  Belford,  Cannon, 
Daggett  and  J.  J.  Martin.  Those  voting  against  the  bill  were  all 
Republicans  except  Bliss,  Covert,  Deuster,  Hurd,  Morrison,  Muller, 
Paehler  and  Fernando  Wood.  This  bill  went  to  the  Senate  and 
was  referred  to  the  Committee  on  Finance,  of  which  Mr.  Bayard  was 
chairman.  It  was  reported  against  by  the  chairman  and  was  never 
acted  upon  by  the  Senate. 

June  9,  1879,  an  act  was  passed  raising  the  limit  of  legal-tender 
for  subsidiary  silver  coins  to  ten  dollars,  and  also  providing  for  their 
redemption  in  full  legal-tender  money. 


53 

tTune  17th,  1879,  while  the  free-coinage  bill,  which  had  passed  the 
House,  was  held  in  the  Finance  Committee  of  the  Senate  by  its 
chairman,  Mr.  Bayard,  Mr.  Vest  offered  the  following  resolution  : 

^^ Resolved  by  the  Senate  (the  House  of  Repi^esentatives  concurring), 
That  the  complete  remonetization  of  silver,  its  full  restoration  as  a 
money  metal,  and  its  free  coinage  by  the  mints  of  the  United  States 
are  demanded  alike  by  the  dictates  of  justice  and  wise  statesman- 
ship. 

This  resolution  was  also  referred  to  the  Committee  on  Finance  by 
a  vote  of  23  to  22,  and  was  not  again  heard  of. 

In  the  Forty-ninth  Congress  a  proviso  was  attached  to  the  sundry 
civil  appropriation  bill  authorizing  the  issue  of  one,  two  and  five 
dollar  silver  certificates.  This  provision  has  operated  to  remove,  in  a 
large  measure,  the  objections  to  silver  where  large  suras  are  required 
in  small  denominations,  as  in  pay-rolls  on  railroads  and  other  like 
operations. 

Thus,  in  one  way  and  another,  have  advances  been  made  in  silver 
legislation,  notwithstanding  the  persistent  opposition  of  every  ad- 
ministration to  silver. 

In  his  last  annual  message,  December,  1880,  two  years  after  the 
passage  of  the  act  of  1878  over  his  veto,  Mr.  Hayes  recommended 
both  the  retirement  of  the  greenbacks  and  the  stoppage  of  the  coin- 
age of  silvjer.     He  said  : 

"The  longer  the  law  remains  in  force,  requiring  as  it  does  the 
coinage  of  a  nominal  dollar,  which,  in  reality,  is  not  a  dollar,  the 
greater  becomes  the  danger  that  this  country  will  be  forced  to  accept 
a  single  metal  as  the  sole  legal  standard  of  value  in  circulation,  and 
this  a  standard  of  less  value  than  it  purports  to  be  worth  in  the 
recognized  money  of  the  world." 

President  Arthur  repeatedly  recommended  the  stoppage  of  the  coin- 
age of  silver.  In  his  last  message,  December,  1884,  he  recom- 
mended the  repeal  of  the  act  of  1878,  and  seems  to  agree  with  his 
Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  "that  unless  this  coinage  and  the  issu- 
ance of  silver  certificates  be  suspended,  silver  is  likely  at  no  distant 
day  to  become  our  sole  metallic  standard."  .    ^ 

Mr.  Cleveland  emphasized  his   opposition  to  silver  by  a  letter  to" 
members  of  the  Forty-eighth  Congress,  before  his  inauguration,  rec- 
ommending the  stoppage  of  the  coinage  of  silver  and  predicting  dire 
consequences  if  it  were  not  immediately  done. 

It  having  been  reported  that  he  intended  to  take  this  position  in  his 
inaugural  address,  ninety-five  Democrats  of  the  House  addressed  to 


• 


54 

him  a  communication,  asking  him  not  to  commit  the  party  to  this  po- 
sition until  all  phases  of  the  question  could  be  fully  considered. 
Mr.  Cleveland's  reply  was  embraced  in  the  following  letter: 

*'  To  the  Eon.  A.  J.  Warner  and  Others,  Members  of  the  Forty-eighth 

Congress. 

"Gentlemen:  The  letter  which  I  have  had  the  honor  to  receive 
from  you  invites,  and,  indeed,  obliges  me  to  give  expression  to  some 
grave  public  necessities,  although  in  advance  of  the  moment  when 
they  would  become  the  objects  of  my  official  care  and  partial  respon- 
sibility. Your  solicitude  that  my  judgment  shall  have  been  carefully 
and  deliberately  formed  is  entirely  just,  and  I  accept  the  suggestion 
in  the  same  friendly  spirit  in  which  it  has  been  made.  It  is  also 
fully  justified  by  the  nature  of  the  financial  crisis  which  under  the 
operation  of  the  act  of  Congress  of  February  28,  1878,  is  now  close 
at  hand.  By  a  compliance  with  the  requirements  of  that  law  all  the 
vaults  of  the  Federal  Treasury  have  been  and  are  heaped  full  of 
silver  coins  which  are  now  worth  less  than  85  per  cent,  of  the  gold 
dollar  prescribed  as  '  the  unit  of  value  '  in  section  14  of  the  act  of  Feb- 
ruary 12,  1873,  and  which,  with  the  silver  certificates  representing 
such  coin,  are  receivable  for  all  public  dues.  Being  thus  receivable, 
while  also  constantly  increasing  in  quantity  at  the  lo.':^  of  $28,000,000 
a  year,  it  has  followed,  of  necessity,  that  the  flow  oi  ^  'd  into  the 
Treasury  has  been  steadily  diminished.  Silver  and  silver  i>^  ;tificates 
have  displaced,  and  are  now  displacing  gold,  and  the  sum  of  gold  in 
the  Federal  Treasury  now  available  for  the  payment  of  the  gold  obli- 
gations of  the  United  States,  and  for  the  redemption  of  the  United 
States  notes  called  '  greenbacks,'  if  not  already  encroached  upon,  is 
perilously  near  such  encroachment.  These  are  facts  which,  as  they 
do  not  admit  of  difference  of  opinion,  call  for  no  argument.  They 
have  been  forewarned  to  us  in  the  official  reports  of  every  Secretary 
of  the  Treasury  from  1878  till  now.  They  are  plainly  affirmed  in 
the  last  D.ecember  report  of  the  present  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  to 
the  Speaker  of  the  present  House  of  Kepresentatives.  They  appear 
in  the  official  docnments  of  this  Congress,  and  in  the  records  of  the 
New  York  Clearing-House,  of  which  the  Treasury  is  a  member,  and 
through  which  the  bulk  of  the  receipts  and  payments  of  the  Federal 
Government  and  of  the  country  pass. 

''  These  being  the  facts  of  our  present  condition,  our  danger  and  our 
duty  to  avert  that  danger  would  seem  to  be  plain.  I  hope  that  you 
concur  with  me  and  with  the  great  majority  of  our  fellow-citizens  in 
deeming  it  most  desirable  at  the  present  juncture  to  maintain  and 
continue  in  use  the  mass  of  our  gold  coin  as  well  as  the  mass  of  silver 
already  coined.  This  is  possible  by  a  present  suspension  of  the  pur- 
chase and  coinage  of  silver.  I  am  not  aware  that  by  any  other 
method  it  is  possible.  It  is  of  momentous  importance  to  prevent  the 
two  metals  from  parting  company ;  io  prevent  the  increasing 
displacement  of  gold  by  the  increasing   coinage   of  silver  ;  to  pre- 


55 

vent  the  disuse  of  gold  in  the  custom-houses  of  the  United 
States  in  the  daily  business  of  the  people  ;  to  prevent  tlie  ulti- 
mate expulsion  of  gold  by  silver.  Such  a  financial  crisis  as  these 
events  would  certainly  precipitate,  were  it  now  to  follow  u[)on  so 
long  a  period  of  commercial  depression,  would  involve  the  people  of 
every  city  and  every  State  in  the  Union  in  a  prolonged  and  disastrous 
trouble.  The  revival  of  business  enterpris#and  prosperity  so  ardently 
desired  and  apparently  so  near  would  be  hopelessly  postponed.  Gold 
would  be  withdrawn  to  its  hoarding-places,  and  an  unprecedented 
contraction  in  the  actual  volume  of  our  currency  would  speedily  take 
place.  Saddest  of  all,  in  every  workshop,  mill,  factory,  store,  and 
on  every  railroad  and  farm,  the  wages  of  labor,  already  depressed, 
would  suffer  still  further  depression  by  a  scaling  down  of  the  purchas- 
ing power  of  every  so-called  dollar  paid  into  the  hand  of  toil.  From 
these  impending  calamities  it  is  surely  a  most  patriotic  and  grateful 
duty  of  the  representatives  of  the  people  to  deliver  them.  I  am, 
gentlemen,  with  sincere  respect,  your  fellow-citizen, 

''GROVER  CLEVELAND." 
^'Albany,  February  24,  1885." 

This  letter  having  been  published,  the  silver  men  in  the  House 
thought  a  reply,  to  be  made  as  public  as  the  letter  had  been,  was  re- 
quired, and  especially  after  the  vote  taken  in  the  meantime  in  the 
House  had  disclosed  the  fact  that  a  decided  majority  of  the  House 
were  opposed  to  stopping  the  coinage  of  silver. 

The  reply  was  given  to  the  press,  with  the  following  preface,  set- 
ting forth  the  reasons  for  its  publication  : 

"  The  friends  of  silvet  in  the  House  of  Representatives,  while  at 
first  inclined  to  make  a  formal  reply  to  the  letter  of  President-elect 
Cleveland,  since  it  has  been  given  to  the  public,  decided  to  reply 
openly  to  the  parts  of  the  letter  with  which  they  do  not  agree.  They 
say  they  did  not  invite  a  controversy,  but,  on  the  contrary,  were 
anxious  to  avoid  it.  They  also  say  it  was  not  until  it  had  become, 
known  that  a  determined  effort  was  being  made  to  induce  the  Presi- 
dent-elect to  commit  himself  and  his  administration  in  advance  to  the 
gold  side  of  the  currency  question  that  they  decided  merely  to  ask 
him  not  to  commit  himself  until  his  Cabinet  was  formed,  and  both 
sides  of  the  question  could  be  considered.  They  proposed  at  first  to 
send  a  delegation  to  present  their  views  to  him,  but,  after  communi- 
cating with  him,  at  his  suggestion  they  sent  a  paper  signed  by 
nearly  one  hundred  members  of  the  present  Congress  and  members- 
«lect  of  the  next  Congress.  No  reply  was  necessary,  they  assert,  and 
none  was  expected.  They  further  say  that,  while  regretting  the  step 
the  President-elect  has  taken  in  advance  of  his  inauguration  and  of 
the  formation  of  his  Cabinet,  they  do  not  propose  to  have  a  contro- 
versy unless  it  is  forced  upon  them.     They  believe,  however,  in  the 


56 

independence  of  the  legislative  brancli  of  the  Government,  and  will 
at  all  times  maintain  it.  They  furnish  the  following  as  a  statement 
of  their  views  : 

THE  REPLY  OF  THE  SILVER  MEN. 

"Washington,  3Iarc7il,  1885. 
"In  the  letter  no  distinction  is  made  between  silver  coin  and  silver 
bullion.  While  it  is  true  that  silver  bullion,  which  is  excluded  from 
coinage,  and  consequently  from  monetary  use,  is  worth  less  (in  the  ratia 
of  16  to  1)  'than  85  percent,  of  the  gold  dollar,'  'silver  coins  which  are 
admitted  to  monetary  use  the  same  as  gold,  are  equal  in  value  to  gold 
coin.'  The  silver  dollar  will  exchange  for  as  much  as  a  gold  dollar.  It 
will  even  buy  the  gold  with  which  a  gold  dollar  may  be  made.  France^ 
with  a  population  of  36.000,000,  and  a  territory  not  as  large  as 
Texas,  has  in  circulation  §600,000,000  of  silver,  with  $850,000,000 
in  gold,  while  we  have  but  $200,000,000  of  full  tender  silver,  to  over 
$600,000,000  of  gold.  Altogether,  $1,300,000,000  of  silver  coins 
at  the  rate  of  15^  to  1  are  held  in  circulation  in  Europe,  side  by  side 
with  $2,600,000,000  of  gold.  Of  paper  and  silver  together,  includ- 
ing silver  certificates,  we  have  less  than  $750,000,000,  which  shows^ 
that  in  this  country  there  is  more  gold  than  paper,  and  nearly  three 
times  as  much  gold  as  silver.  With  this  proportion  in  our  currency, 
and  with  gold  and  silver  equally  full  tender  for  everything,  it  is  dif- 
ficult to  understand  why  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  might  not,  if 
he  chose  to  do  so,  pay  out  more  silver  and  less  gold.  Of  course,  if 
while  receiving  into  the  Treasury,  United  States  notes,  silver  and 
silver  certificates,  gold  or  gold  certificates,  he  pays  out  only  gold,  hi& 
stock  of  gold  would  diminish.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  he  should  pay 
out  more  silver  and  paper  and  less  gold,  the  character  of  the  reserve 
in  the  Treasury  would  change.  In  other  words,  this  is  a  matter  en- 
tirely under  the  control  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury.  There 
would  be  no  need  of  legal-tender  if  the  one  who  receives  money  be 
permitted  always  to  choose  the  kind  he  will  haVe." 

How  Silver  Displaces  Gold. 

"  That  silver  and  silver  certificates  take  the  place  of  or  displace 
gold,  is  true,  but  only  as  Treasury  or  bank  notes  displace  it.  The 
withdrawal  of  a  hundred  millions  of  bank  notes,  or  the  issuance  of 
a  hundred  millions,  has  the  same  effect  on  gold  as  so  much  in  silver 
or  silver  certificates.  Why  has  it  never  been  proposed  to  withdraw 
national  bank  notes  as  a  means  of  preventing  the  expulsion  of  gold  ?"' 

Gold  Obligations. 

"To  the  proposition  that  there  now  exists  or  ever  have  existed 
under  our  Constitution  obligations  specifically  payable  in  gold,  the  sil- 
ver men  feel  it  their  solemn  duty  to  enter  their  most  emphatic  dissent 
at  the  very  outset  of  the  discussion  of  the  currency  question.    No  such 


57 

obligations  exist  or  ever  diJ  exist.  Webster  said  :  'Gold  and  silver, 
at  rates  fixed  by  Congress,  constitute  the  legal  standard  of  value  in 
this  country,  and  neither  Congress  nor  any  State  has  authority  to 
establish  any  other  standard,  or  to  displace  this.' 

"The  'act  to  strengthen  the  public  credit,'  approved  March  18, 
1869,  solemnly  pledges  the  United  States  to  the  payment  of  the  bonds 
in  coin.  The  Refunding  Act  of  July  14,  1870,  provided  for  the  pay- 
ment of  all  refunding  bonds  in  coin  of  the  then  present  standard  value, 
which  is  the  same  as  the  present  value.  The  Resumption  Act  of 
January  14,  1875,  provided  that  from  and  after  the  first  day  of  Janu- 
ary, 1879,  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  should  redeem  in  coin,  the 
outstanding  legal-tender  notes. 

"The  act  of  February  28,  1878,  providing  for  the  resumption  of 
the  cdKnage  of  the  standard  dollar,  made  silver  dollars  legal-tender 
for  all  debts  and  dues,  public  and  private,  unless  otherwise  expressly 
stipulated  in  the  contract ;  and  there  is  not  a  public  obligation  out- 
standing, and  never  was,  containing  a  stipulation  for  payment  in 
gold. 

"  In  January,  1878,  Congress  adopted  the  following  concurrent 
resolution  offered  by  Stanley  Matthews,  then  Senator,  now  on  the 
Supreme  bench : 

'  Besolved,  That  all  the  bonds  of  the  United  States  issued,  or  au- 
thorized to  be  issued,  under  the  said  acts  of  Congress  hereinbefore 
recited,  are  payable,  principal  and  interest,  at  the  option  of  the  Gov- 
ernment of  the  United  States,  in  silver  dollars  of  the  coinage  of  the 
United  States,  containing  412^  grains  each  of  standard  silver  ;  and 
that  to  restore  to  its  coinage  such  silver  coins  as  a  legal-tender  in 
payment  of  said  bonds,  principal  and  interest,  is  not  in  violation  of 
the  public  faith,  nor  in  derogation  of  the  rights  of  the  public  credi- 
tor.' Over  $900,000,000  of  the  bonds  now  outstanding  were  issued 
since  the  passage  of  this  resolution  and  the  act  of  1878." 

The  Opinions  of  Secretaries.   « 

"The  opinions  of  Secretaries  of  the  Treasury  from  1878  down,  are 
referred  to  as  authority.  The  opinions  of  Secretaries  are  valuable 
when  supported  by  facts  and  sound  reasons,  but  ought  not  to  control 
unless  they  are.  It  cannot  be  forgotten,  however,  that  these  same 
Secretaries  have  steadily  predicted  what  has  not  taken  place." 

Coin  of  the  Two  Metals. 

"  The  friends  of  silver  concur  in  the  opinion  that  it  is  most  desirable 
'to  maintain  and  continue  in  use  the  mass  of  our  gold  coin,  as  well 
as  the  mass  of  silver  already  coined.'  They  agree,  too,  that  it  is  of 
'momentous  importance  to  prevent  the  coin  of  the  two  metals  from 
parting  company.'  But  the  two  metals,  as  metals,  have  already 
parted  company  under  the  influence  of  silver  demonetization  in  other 
countries,  and  the  hostility  of  the  Treasury  and  the  banks  to  silver 
in  this.     But  that  the  continued  coinage  of  silver  at  the  rate  of  §28,- 


58 

000,000  a  3^ear  will  drive  gold  out  of  circulation  in  the  near  future, 
or  force  it  to  a  premium,  does  not  to  them  seem  to  be  sustained  by 
facts  or  sound  reasoning.  The  total  volume  of  currency  in  the  United 
States,  outside  of  gold,  is  less  than  $750,000,000.  It  is  believed  to 
be  a  principle  of  economic  science,  perfectl}'-  well  settled,  that  if  a 
volume  of  $750,000,000  is  not  sufficient  in  itself  to  maintain  prices 
in  this  country  at  the  level  of  international  prices,  then  gold  will 
come  here  and  stay  here  in  sufficient  amount  to  make,  with  the  vol- 
ume already  in  circulation,  what  will  constitute  our  distributive  share 
of  the  world's  money  as  determined  by  our  international  trade. 
That  $750,000,000  is  not  a  sufficient  volume  to  maintain  prices  at  the 
world's  level  of  prices  is  evidenced  by  the  fact  that  $600,000,000  gold, 
a  considerable  part  of  which  at  least  is  in  circulation,  either  in  the 
form  of  coin  or  certificates,  now  stays  here,  and  it  will  go  awaf  only 
when  prices  become  lower  elsewhere  than  they  are  here. 

"It  is  believed,  therefore,  that  no  such  crisis  as  has  been  foreboded 
can  overtake  us  under  existing  conditions.  It  is  not  believed  to  be  in 
the  power  of  all  the  banks  in  the  country,  even  if  they  were  so  dis- 
posed, to  take  gold  out  of  circulation  and  hold  it  for  any  length  of 
time  at  a  premium.  They  must  first  lock  up  the  world's  money  and 
arrest  the  world's  commerce.  Nor  can  the  paper,  or  silver,  or  silver 
certificates  now  in  circulation  side  by  side  with  gold,  expel  the  gold. 
The  gold  can  be  expelled  only  by  forcing  into  circulation,  in  addition 
to  the  $750,000,000,  either  silver  or  paper  equal  to  the  entire  volume 
of  gold  now  in  circulation.  In  that  manner,  under  Gresham's  law, 
gold  might  be  expelled,  and  probably  would  be.  It  is  doubtless  true, 
too,  that,  if  population  and  wealth  in  this  country  were  at  a  stand, 
then  the  continued  coinage  of  silver  in  sufficient  volume  would,  in 
time  expel  gold  from  circulation ;  but  as  long  as  population  and 
wealth  go  on  increasing,  then  the  conditions  of  the  problem  are 
changed.  In  fact,  in  order  to  preserve  a  stable  ratio  between  money 
volume  and  population  and  wealth,  an  annual  increase  of  not  less 
than  $40,000,000  of  currency  of  some  kind  is  now  required." 

Additional  Coin  Needed. 

"In  other  words,  the  increase  of  population  and  wealth  calls  for 
an  addition  to  our  circulation  of  at  least  $40,000,000  a  year.  If,  while 
these  conditions  continue,  silver  is  coined  at  the  rate  of  only  $28,000,- 
000  a  year,  there  is  left  still  a  considerable  void  to  be  filled  with  gold. 
This  is  the  reason  why  gold  has  increased  in  the  country  steadily 
since  the  act  of  1878  was  passed,  and  why  gold  has  increased  by  nearly 
$14,000,000  during  the  last  year,  and  is  now  increasing  at  the  rate 
of  nearly  $1,000,000  a  month,  notwithstanding  the  depression  of 
business  in  the  country.  As  a  matter  of  fact  there  is  to-day  more 
gold  in  the  country  than  there  ever  was  before.  Another  fact  is  that 
880,000,000  of  the  gold  in  the  Treasury  was  put  there  in  exchange 
for  silver  certificates." 


59 

Effect  of  Stopping  the  Coinage  of  Silver. 

''The  immediate  effect  of  stopping  the  coinage  of  silver  must  neces- 
sarily be  to  lower  the  price  of  silver  bullion  and  gradually  to  appre- 
ciate the  value  of  gold  the  world  over.  The  difficulties  in  the  way 
of  establishing  an  international  ratio  so  much  desired,  or  of  a  read- 
justment of  relative  value  to  gold  here,  would  thereby  be  increased." 

Things  Impossible. 

"How  it  is  possible  for  such  things  to  take  place  as  are  predicted  in 
the  last  paragraph  of  the  letter,  it  is  difficult  to  see.  Gold  is  to  be 
withdrawn  to  'its  hoarding-places,'  followed  by  an  'unprecedented 
contraction  in  the  actual  volume  of  our  currency.'  Such  a  con- 
traction, it  has  been  shown,  must  be  followed  by  a  great  fall  of  prices. 
What  then?  Would  not  gold  flow  here,  as  the  tides  flow?  Surely, 
it  would  come  as  fast  as  ships  could  bring  it.  What  would  those 
who  have  been  hoarding  gold  do  with  it  then?  'Labor,'  the  letter 
says,  'already  greatly  depressed,  would  suffer  still  further  depres- 
sion by  the  scaling  down  of  the  purchasing  power  of  every  so-called 
dollar  paid  into  the  hand  of  toil.'  Here,  in  one  sentence,  we  have 
'gold  hoarded,'  'unprecedented  contraction,'  'fall  of  prices,'  and 
the  'scaling  down  of  the  purchasing  power  of  the  dollar.'  That 
is,  when  these  'impending  calamities'  come,  prices  are  to  fall, every- 
thing become  cheaper,  and  money  become  less  valuable  at  the  same 
time!  That  is,  both  sides  of  the  balance  go  down  together!  Usually 
one  side  goes  up  as  the  other  goes  down.  Usually,  whf^n  commodi- 
ties become  cheaper,  money  becomes  relatively  dearer,  and  vice  versa. 
Usually  a  contraction  of  the  money  volume  results  in  a  rise  in  the 
value  of  money,  and  not  in  a  fall.  The  contradictions  involved  in 
this  paragraph  of  the  letter  are  hardly  calculated  to  carry  conviction 
to  those  who  have  ever  studied  money  questions  at  all,  or  to  awaken 
in  them  any  sense  of  alarm  at  approaching  calamities  from  such 
causes." 

Need  of  a  Business  Revival. 

"In  one  thing  all  will  agree,  and  that  is  in  the  importance  to  the 
whole  country,  and  especially  to  the  laboring  classes  now  struggling 
with  want,  of  a  revival  of  business  and  a  return  of  prosperity.  The 
one  condition  essential  to  this  is  to  stop  the  contraction  of  the  cur- 
rency. No  country  ever  did  thrive  and  no  country  ever  can  thrive 
while  its  money  is  undergoing  contraction.  Business  cannot  be  se- 
cure when  its  foundation  is  constantly  giving  way.  Stability  in  the 
volume  of  money  is  the  one  essential  requisite  to  safe  and  prosperous 
business. 

"  But  what  is  the  monetary  condition  of  the  world  to-day  ?  Are  we 
not  brought  face  to  face  with  the  startling  fact  that  the  gold  pro- 
duction of  the  world  has  fallen  below  its  consumption  in  the  arts, 


60 

and  that  there  is  no  probability  of  any  new  gold  for  money  supply 
for  the  centuries  to  come?  With  this  condition  of  things  as  to 
gold,  shut  off  silver,  as  is  now  proposed,  and  where  is  the  money 
supply,  even  for  keeping  up  the  stock  of  coin  now  in  the  hands  of 
the  world,  to  come  from?  " 

Gloomy  Prospects  Ahead. 

"As  aggravating  this  state  of  affairs  in  this  country,  the  paper  cur- 
rency is  undergoing  contraction  by  the  surrender  of  bank-notes.  If 
this  state  of  things  is  to  last,  upon  what  is  there  to  build  hope  of  re- 
turning prosperity?  In  the  last  three  years,  according  to  the  Lon- 
don Economist,  prices  have  fallen  more  than  20  percent.;  that  is, 
money  has  appreciated  in  that  ratio.  In  'the  quarter  of  a  century 
following  the  gold  discoveries  of  California  and  Australia,  the  stock 
of  the  precious  metals  in  use  as  money  was  increased  by  nearly  40 
per  cent.  The  trade  and  commerce  of  Great  Britain  and  the  United 
States  during  the  same  period  increased  more  that  fourfold,  and 
wealth  proportionally.  Reverse  these  conditions,  shut  off  all  money 
supply,  and  what  room  for  hope  is  there  for  mankind  except  for 
those  whose  incomes  are  sure?  With  the  appreciation  of  money  all 
debts  appreciate.  When  it  is  remembered  that  such  debts  run  into  the 
tens  of  billions — more  than  the  entire  present  wealth  of  the  United 
States — the  vast  consequences  of  the  appreciation  of  money  are  seen. 
The  control  of  feudal  lords  over  the  earth  in  the  middle  ages  was  in- 
significant compared  with  the  control  of  modern  creditor  kings  and 
lords  who,  through  legislation,  can  secure  an  increase  in  the  value 
of  money.  It  can  be  shown  that  it  will  take  more  labor,  or  more  of 
the  produce  of  labor,  to  pay  what  remains  of  our  own  national  debt 
now  that  it  would  have  taken  to  pay  it  all  at  the  close  of  the  war. 
Eighteen  million  bales  of  cotton  were  the  equivalent  in  value  of  the 
entire  interest-bearing  debt  in  1865,  but  it  will  take  35,000,000  bales 
at  the  price  of  cotton  now,  to  pay  the  remainder  of  the  debt.  Twenty- 
five  million  tons  of  bar  iron  would  have  paid  the  whole  debt  in  1865  ; 
it  will  now  take  35,000,000  tons  to  pay  what  remains  after  all  that 
has  been  paid  as  principal  and  interest. 

"In  view  of  the  vast  interests  involved,  the  friends  of  silver  did  not 
think  it  too  much  to  ask  that  the  question  of  stopping  the  coinage 
of  silver  should  not  be  separated  from  its  relation  to  the  whole  cur- 
rency question  and  acted  upon  by  itself.  The  currency  question, 
it  is  believed,  at  the  present  time  overshadows  all  other  questions, 
and  all  the  friends  of  silver  have  asked  is  that  the  President-elect 
should  give  it  full  consideration  and  hear  both  sides  before  commit- 
ting his  administration  to  any  particular  view  respecting  it.* 

*An  attempt  was  made  to  carry  out  Mr.  Cleveland's  recommendation  to  stop  the 
coii^age  of  silver  by  attaching  a  provision  to  that  effect  to  the  sundry  civil  bill, 
then  pending  in  the  House,  but  this  was  voted  down  February  26,  1885. 

In  Bubmitung  the  question  to  a  vote — 

The  Speaker  said:  "The  Chair  has  already  stated  that  if  this  resolution  be 


61 

On  the  8th  of  April,  1886,  in  the  Forty-ninth  Congress,  a  bill  pro- 
Tiding  for  free  coinage,  which  had  been  reported  adversely  by  the 
Committee  on  Coinage,  Weights  and  Measures,  came  before  tlie 
House,  when  Mr.  Dibble,  of  South  Carolina,  offered  as  a  substitute 
for  the  bill  one  providing  that  unless  prior  to  July  1, 1889,  silver  was 
remonetized  "  through  the  concurrent  action  of  the  nations  of  Europe 
with  the  United  States  "  coinage  under  the  act  of  1878  should  be 
discontinued.     This  was  rejected  by  yeas  84,  nays  201. 

Meantime  Mr.  Cleveland  repeated  in  several  messages  his  recom- 
mendations to  stop  the  coinage  of  silver.  The  attitude,  moreover, 
of  his  Secretaries,  and  especially  of  his  Treasurer,  Mr.  Jordan, 
towards  silver,  as  well  as  his  selection  of  men  to  represent  to  other 
countries  the  position  of  the  United  States  on  the  silver  question, 
marked  his  administration  as  throughout  peculiarly  hostile  to  silver. 

In  the  light  of  experience  no  doubt  all  the  Presidents  who,  follow- 
ing the  advice  of  Wall  street,  have  made  predictions  that  could  not 
and  have  not  come  true,  would  withdraw  them  if  they  could. 

The  prediction  of  all  the  Presidents  and  Secretaries  from  the  pass- 
age of  the  act  of  1878  down,  have  been  that  the  continued  coinage  of 
silver  at  the  rate  of  $2,000,000  a  month  even,  would  drive  out  gold 
and  leave  us  with  only  silver.  In  these  predictions  the  laws  govern- 
ing the  distribution  of' metallic  money  were  entirely  ignored. 

Unless  silver  was  coined  in  excess  of  the  amount  required  to  furnish 
us  our  full  distributive  shareofthe  world'smoneyjit  could  notdriveout 
gold.  In  other  words,  unless  our  silver  coinage  was  annually  greater 
than  required  to  maintain  an  even  ratio  between  money  volume  and 
population  and  wealth,  no  gold  would  be  expelled  by  it ;  but,  on 
the  contrary,  if  the  coinage  of  silver  was  not  sufficient  to  meet  this 
increased  need   for  money,  gold  would  come  here  to  fill  the  void. 


passed,  which  requires  a  vote  of  two-thirds,  then  the  bill,  whatever  may  be  ia- 
eluded  in  it,  can  be  passed  by  a  majority  of  the  House." 

The  question  was  taken ;  and  it  was  decided  in  the  negative— yeas  118,  nays  152, 
not  voting  54. 

The  following  Republicans  voted  against  stopping  the  coinage  of  silver : 
Anderson,  Atkinson,  Belford,  Breitung,  Cannon,  Funston,  Goflf,  Hanback,  Hart, 
Henderson,  T.  J.,  Hepburn,  Holmes,  Houk,  Keifer,  Kellogg,  McCoid,  Millikeu, 
Nelson,  Payson,  Perkins,  Peters,  Petti  none.  Price,  Rowell,  Ryan,  Stephenson, 
Thomas,  Weaver,  White,  J.  D.,  Wilson,  Jas.,  Wood. 

The  following  Democrats  voted  to  strp  the  coinage:  Adams,  J.  J.,  Arnot,  Bagley, 
Barbour,  Beach,  Belmont,  Bowen,  Buckner,  Collins,  Connolly,  Converse,  Cox,  S, 
S.,  Dargan,  Deuster,  Eaton,  Elliot,  Ellis,  Ermentrout,  Ferrell,  Fiedler,  Findley, 
Follett,  Garrison,  Greenleaf,  Hancock,  Hardy,  Hewett,  A.  S.,  Hoblitzell,  Hopkins, 
Hunt,  Hutchens,  Jones,  B.  W.,  Mitchell,  Morse,  Moulton,  Muller,  Mutchler,  Post, 
Potter,  Pusey,  Randall,  Rogers,  W.  H.,  Seymour,  Snyder,  Sprigs,  Stevens,  Storm, 
Swope,  Talbott,  Tucker,  Van  Alstyne,  Winans,  Jno.,  Woodward. 


62 

And  that  is  just  what  has  taken  place.  The  coinage  of  $2,000,000  a 
month  has  not  heen  enough  to  take  the  place  of  bank  notes  canceled 
and  supply  the  demand  of  a  growing  population,  and  consequently 
gold  has  come  here,  resulting  in  a  relative  contraction  of  the  world's 
supply  of  money  to  the  hurt  of  every  country,  by  lowering  prices 
everywhere. 

From  1878  to  1890  the  increase  of  gold  in  this  country,  as  the  re- 
sult of  the  law  above  given,  has  been  $592,000,000.* 

Will  the  present  law  requiring  the  purchase  of  4,500,000  ounces, 
and  the  issue  of  notes  therefor,  supply  the  requirements  of  the  grow- 
ing population  and  business  of  this  country,  and  also  take  the  place 
of  national  bank  notes  ?     This  is  the  problem. 

Those  who  have  studied  this  question  most  thoroughly  have  come 
to  the  conclusion  that  free  coinage  will  no  more  than  supply  this 
want  now,  and  that  the  question  likely  to  arise  in  the  near  future  is  not 
whether  there  will  be  too  much  gold  and  silver  for  money,  but  what 
must  be  done  to  prevent  the  disastrous  consequences  of  an  insufficient 
supply  of  metallic  money,  which  must  always  result  in  falling  prices 
and  hard  times,  unless  provided  against  in  some  way. 

International  Conferences. 

The  second  section  of  the  act  of  1878  provided  for  an  international 
conference  to  consider  the  adoption  of  a  common  ratio  between  gold 
and  silver  for  all  commercial  nations. 

The  commissioners  on  the  part  of  the  United  States  were  Mr.  Fen- 
ton,  Mr.  Grroesbeck  and  Mr.  Walker.  Mr.  S.  Dana  Horton  was  ap- 
pointed secretary.  Austria,  Belgium,  France,  Italy,  The  Nether- 
lands, Russia,  Sweden  and  Norway  were  represented. 

The  ^commission  held  several  sessions  at  Paris  between  August 
10  and  October  17,  when  the  American  delegates  submitted  their 
report.  In  this  report  they  say  :  "As  it  was,  early  in  the  course  of 
the  proceedings,  shown  to  be  impossible,  under  the  complications  ex- 
isting, to'secure  an  agreement  for  giving  circulation  to  silver  as 
money  of  full  power,  your  commissioners  assented  to  the  views  of 
leading  members  *  *  *  that  it  was  useless  to  discuss  the 
particular  ratio — whether  1  to  15^  or  1  to  16,  or  some  other." 

The  report  of  this  conference,  published  by  authority  of  Congress, 
contains  a  good  deal  of  information,  but  no  practical  results  were 
reached. 


*  See  report  of  Director  of  the  Mint  for  1889. 


63 

The  Monetary  Conference  of  1881. 

A  second  international  conference  met  at  Paris  April  19,  1881. 
The  representatives  from  the  United  States  were  Mr.  Evarts,  Mr. 
Thurman,  and  Mr.  Howe.  S.  Dana  Horton  was  appointed  secretary 
to  this  legation  also.     The  following  states  were  represented  : 

Austria-Hungary,  Belgium,  Denmark,  Germany,  Greece,  The 
Netherlands,  Portugal,  Sweden,  Norway,  Spain,  Switzerland,  France 
and  the  United  States. 

Thirteen  sessions  were  held,  but,  as  with  the  previous  conference, 
no  practical  results  were  arrived  at. 

Early  in  the  conference  the  United  States  delegates  submitted  the 
following  propositions  : 

I, 

"  It  is  the  opinion  of  this  assembly  that  it  is  not  to  be  desired  that 
silver  should  be  excluded  from  free  coinage  in  Europe  and  the  United 
States  of  America.  On  the  contrary,  the  assembly  believe  that  it  is 
desirable  that  the  unrestricted  coinage  of  silver,  and  its  use  as  money 
of  unlimited  legal  tender,  should  be  retained  where  they  exist,  and, 
as  far  as  practicable,  restored  where  they  have  ceased  to  exist." 

II. 

"  The  use  of  both  gold  and  silver  as  unlimited  legal-tender  money 
may  be  safely  adopted  ;  first,  by  equalizing  them  at  a  relation  to  be 
fixed  by  international  agreement;  and,  secondly,  by  granting  to  each 
metal,  at  the  relation  fixed,  equal  terms  of  coinage,  making  no  dis- 
crimination between  them." 

The  answer  to  which  was  made  in  the  following  terms : 

^'  The  delegates  of  the  European  states,  represented  in  the  confer- 
ence, desire  to  express  their  sincere  thanks  to  the  Government  of  the 
United  States  for  having  procured  an  international  interchange  of 
opinion  upon  a  subject  of  so  much  importance  as  the  monetary  ques- 
tion. 

"  Having  maturely  considered  the  proposals  of  the  representatives 
of  the  United  States,  they  recognize : 

"  1.  That  it  is  necessary  to  maintain  in  the  world  the  monetary 
functions  of  silver,  as  well  as  those  of  gold,  but  that  the  selections 
for  use  of  one  or  the  other  of  the  two  metals,  or  of  both  simultane- 
ously, should  be  governed  by  the  special  position  of  each  State,  or 
group  of  States. 

''2.  That  the  question  of  the  restriction  of  the  coinage  of  silver 
should  equally  be  left  to  the  discretion  of  each  state,  or  group  of 
states,  according  to  the  particular  circumstances  in  which  they  may 
find  themselves  placed,  and  the  more  so  in  that  the  disturbance  pro- 
duced during  the  recent  years  in  the  silver  market  has  variously  af- 
fected the  monetary  situation  of  the  several  countries. 


64 

''  3.  That  the  differences  of  opinion  which  have  appeared,  and  the 
fact  that  even  some  of  the  states  which  have  the  double  standard, 
find  it  impossible  to  enter  into  a  mutual  engagement  with  regard  to 
the  free  coinage  of  silver,  exclude  the  discussion  of  the  adoption  of  a 
common  ratio  between  the  two  metals." 

The  report  of  the  American  delegates  to  this  conference  made  a 
large  volume,  containing,  like  the  report  of  the  preceding  confer- 
ence, much  valuable  matter,  which  was  printed  first  in  1881  and  re- 
printed in  1887,  but,  as  with  the  previous  conference,  no  practical 
results  followed. 


CHAPTER  VI. 


Silver  in  the  Fifty-First  Congress. 

In  his  annual  report  for  188^,  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  while 
Tecommending  a  larger  use  of  silver,  proposed  a  plan  which,  in  un- 
friendly hands,  it  was  feared,  might  result  in  the  complete  demone- 
tization of  silver.  His  proposition  was  to  repeal  the  act  of  1878,  re- 
quiring the  purchase  of  not  less  than  two  million  dollars'  worth  of 
silver  each  m£)nth,  and  to  substitute  in  its  place  a  law  authorizing  the 
purchase  of  silver  bullion  at  its  market  value,  and  the  issue  of  notes 
therefor,  with  the  right  to  redeem  the  notes  in  bullion  at  its  market 
price  at  the  time  of  redemption  ;  thus  making  of  silver  bullion  a 
commodity  to  be  sold  off  when  necessary  to  redeem  notes  issued  for 
it^  instead  of  making  the  silver  itself  money  needing  no  redemption. 

The  following  is  the  proposition  of  the  Secretary  as  given  in  his 
annual  report: 

Issue  Treasury  notes  against  deposits  of  silver  bullion  at  the  market  price  of 
silver  when  deposited,  payable  on  demand  in  such  quantities  of  silver  bullion  as 
will  equal  in  value,  at  the  date  of  presentation,  the  number  of  dollars  expressed 
on  the  face  of  the  notes  at  the  market  price  of  silver,  or  in  gold,  at  the  option  of 
the  Government ;  or  in  silver  dollars  at  the  option  of  the  holder.  Repeal  the  com- 
pulsory feature  of  the  present  coinage  act. 

In  this  proposition  there  is  no  restriction  on  the  amount  of  silver 
that  may  be  deposited,  but  in  the  bill  formulated  in  the  Treasury 
Department  and  introduced  in  the  House,  the  deposit  of  silver  was 
limited  to  the  product  of  the  mines  of  the  United  States. 

This  bill  was  introduced  in  the  House  by  Mr.  Conger,  January  20th, 
1890,  and  numbered  5381.  The  following  is  the  bill  as  first  intro- 
duced in  the  House: 

A  BILL  (H.  R.  5381)  authorizing  the  issue  of  Treasury  notes  on  deposits  of 
silver  bullion. 

Be  it  enoctfd  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives  of  the  United  States  of  Amer- 
ica in  Congress  assembled,  That  any  owner  of  silver  bullion,  the  product  of  the  mines 
of  the  United  Slates  or  of  ores  smelted  or  refined  in  the  United  States,  may  (deposit 
the  same  at  any  coinag«  mint  or  at  any  apsay  office  in  the  United  States  that  the 
Secretary  of  the  Treasury  may  des'gnate,  and  re  tive  therefor  Treasury  notes  here- 
inafter provided  for,  equal  at  the  date  of  deposit  to  the  net  value  of  such  silver,  at 
the  market  price,  such  price  to  be  determined  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury 
Tinder  rules  and  regulations  prescribed,  based  upon  the  price  current  in  the  lead- 
ing silver  markets  of  the  world  ;  but  no  deposit  consisting  in  whole  or  in  part  of 
silver  bullion  or  foreign  silver  coins  imported  into  this  country,  or  bars  resulting 
from  melted  or  refined  foreign  silver  coins,  shall  be  received  under  the  provisions 
of  this  act. 

Sec.  2.  That  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  shall  cause  to  be  prepared  Treasury 
notes  in  such  amounts  as  may  be  required  for  the  purpose  of  the  above  section, 
and  in  such  form  and  denominations  as  he  may  prescribe :  Frovidtd,  That  no  note 
shall  be  of  a  denomination  less  than  one  dollar  nor  more  than  one  thousand  dol- 
lars. 


66 

Skc  3.  That  the  notes  issued  under  this  act  shall  be  receivable  for  customs,  tasreS;, 
and  all  public  dues,  and  when  received  into  the  Treasury  may  be  reissued,  and 
Buch  notee,  when  held  by  any  national  banking  association,  shall  be  counted  as 
part  of  its  lawful  reserve. 

Sec.  4.  That  the  notes  issued  under  the  provisions  of  this  act  shall  be  redeemed 
upon  demand  at  the  Treasury  of  the  United  States  or  at  the  oflBce  of  an  Assistant 
Treasurer  of  the  United  States,  by  the  issue  of  a  certificate  of  deposit  for  the  sum 
of  the  notes  so  presented,  payable  at  one  of  the  mints  of  the  United  States,  in  an 
amount  of  silver  bullion  equal  in  value,  on  the  date  of  said  certificate,  to  the  num- 
ber of  dollars  stated  therein,  at  the  market  price  of  silver,  to  be  determined  as  pro- 
vided in  section  one;  or  such  notes  may  be  redeemed  in  gold  coin,  at  the  option 
of  the  Government :  Provided,  That  upon  demand  of  the  holder,  such  notes  shall 
be  redeemed  in  silver  dollars. 

Sec.  5.  That  when  the  market  price  of  silver,  as  determined  by  the  Secretary  of 
the  Treasury,  shall  exceed  one  dollar  for  three  hundred  and  .seventy-one  and 
twenty-five  hundredths  grains  of  pure  silver,  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Secretary 
of  the  Treasury  to  refuse  to  receive  deposits  of  silver  bullion  for  the  purposes  o£ 
this  act. 

Sec.  6.  That  it  shall  be  lawful  for  the  Sacretary  of  the  Treasury,  with  the  ap- 
proval of  the  President  of  the  United  States,  to  suspend,  temporarily,  the  receipt 
of  silver  bullion  for  Treasury  notes  at  any  time  when  he  is  satisfied  that  through 
combinations  or  speculative  manipulation  of  the  market  the  price  of  silver  is  arbi- 
trary, nominal,  or  fictitious. 

Skc.  7.  That  the  silver  bullion  deposited  under  this  act,  represented  by  Treasury 
notes  which  have  been  redeemed  in  gold  coin  or  in  silver  dollars,  may  be  coined 
into  standaid  silver  dollars  or  any  other  denomination  of  silver  coin  now  author- 
ized by  law,  for  the  purpose  of  replacing  the  coin  used  in  the  redemption  of  the 
notes. 

Sec.  8.  That  so  much  of  the  act  of  February  twenty-eighth,  eighteen  hundred 
and  seventy-eight,  entitled  "An  act  to  authorize  the  coinage  of  the  standard  sil- 
ver dollar  and  to  restore  its  legal-tender  character,"  aa  requires  the  monthly  pur- 
chase and  coinage  into  silver  dollars  of  not  less  than  two  million  dollars  nor  more^ 
than  four  million  dollars'  worth  of  silver  bullion,  is  hereby  repealed. 

Sec.  9.  That  any  gain  or  seigniorage  arising  from  the  coinage  which  maybe  exe- 
cuted under  the  provisions  of  this  act,  shall  be  accounted  for  and  paid  into  the 
Treasury  as  provided  by  existing  law. 

Sec.  10.  That  silver  bullion  received  under  the  provisions  of  this  act  shall  be 
subject  to  the  requirements  of  existing  law,  and  the  regulations  of  the  mint  ser- 
vice, governing  the  methods  of  receipt,  determining  the  amount  of  pure  silver 
contained,  and  the  amount  of  charges  or  deductions,  if  any,  to  be  made. 

Sec.  11.  That  nothing  in  this  act  shall  be  construed  to  prevent  the  purchase,  from 
time  to  time,  as  may  be  required,  of  silver  bullion  for  the  subsidiary  silver  coinage. . 

Sec.  12.  That  a  sum  sufficient  to  carry  out  the  provisions  of  this  act  is  hereby 
appropriated  out  of  any  money  in  the  Treasury  not  otherwise  appropriated. 

Sec.  13.  That  all  acts  and  parts  of  acts  inconsistent  with  the  provisions  of  this 
act  are  hereby  repealed. 

Sec.  14.  That  this  act  shall  take  efiect  thirty  days  from  and  after  its  passage. 

A  bill,  in  substance,  the  same,  was  introduced  in  the  Senate.  Vari- 
ous other  bills,  including  a  number  for  free  coinage,  were  also  intro- 
duced in  the  House  and  Senate,  Among  these  were  the  following, 
by  Mr.  Culberson,  of  Texas,  and  by  Mr.  Townsend,  of  Colorado,  which, 
though  brief,  cover  the  question  : 

By  Mr.   Culberson,   of  Texas.     Bill  to  repeal  the  restriction  upon 

the  coinage  of  the  silver  dollar : 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives  of  the  United  States  of  Amer- 
ica in  Congress  assembled,  That  all  laws  or  parts  of  laws  which  limit  the  coinage 
of  the  silver  dollar  be,  and  the  same  are  hereby,  repealed. 

This  should  have  included  legal  tender  as  well  as  coinage. 


67 

By  Mr.  Townsend,  of  Colorado.  To  provide  for  the  free  and  un- 
limited coinage  of  the  silver  dollar. 

Be  it  enaded^y  the  Senate  and  Hottse  of  Eepresentatives  of  the  United  States  of  AmeV' 
ica  in  Congress  asseiiihled,  That  it  shall  be  lawful  for  any  person  or  persons  to 
deposit  at  any  mint  of  the  United  States  silver  bullion  of  standard  fineness,  in  quan- 
tities of  not  less  than  one  hundred  ouiicts,  and  to  have  the  same  coined  into  dol- 
lars of  four  hundred  and  twelve  and  one-half  grains  troy,  on  the  same  terms  and 
subject  to  like  conditions  that  gold  is  received  and  coined  at  said  mints  ;  and  eaid 
dollars  shall  be  legal-tender,  at  their  nominal  value,  for  all  debts  and  dues,  public 
and  private. 

Among  the  arguments  advanced  by  the  Secretary  in  favor  of  the 

plan  proposed  by  him,  was  the  following  : 

By  this  method  it  is  believed  that  the  way  would  be  paved  for  the  opening  of 
the  mints  of  the  world  to  the  free  coinage  of  silver  and  the  restoration  of  the 
former  equilibrium  of  the  money  metals. 

The  Committee  on  Coinage.  Weights  and  Measures  entered  upon 
the  consideration  of  the  Conger  Bill,  containing  the  Treasury  proposi- 
tion, January  27,  1890.     The  committee  consisted  of — 

Edwin  H.  Conger,  of  Iowa,    S.  G.  Comstock,  cf  Minn.,    Charles  Tracy,  of  N.  Y., 
Charles  P.  Wickham,  of  O.,    Horace  F.  Bartine,  of  Nev.,  Wm.  Mutchler,  of  Penn., 
Joseph  H.  Walker,  of  Mass.,  Charles  J.  Kuapp,  of  N.  Y.,  W.  F.  Wilcox,  of  Conn., 
Thos.  H.  Carter,  of  Mon.,       Abner  Taylor,  of  111.,  Antonio  Joseph,  of  N.  M. 

Jas.  R.  Williams,  of  111.,  Richard  P.  Bland,  of  Mo., 

Various  persons  appeared  before  this  Committee  to  give  testimony 
or  submit  arguments  on  the  subject;  araougthera  were  Senator  Teller, 
A.  J.  Warner,  Chairman  of  the  National  Silver  Committee  ;  E.  D. 
Stark,  Hon.  G.  G.  Symes,  Mr.  Joseph  Sheldon,  and  others  ;  Secre- 
tary Windom  also  appeared  and  explained  his  plan  at  length  to  the 
Committee.  March  26th,  1890,  Mr.  Conger  reported  the  bill  back 
to  the  House  amended  to  read  as  follows  : 

H.  R.  5381,  Fifty-first  Congress,  first  session. 

A  BILL  authorizing  the  issue  of  Treasury  notes  on  deposits  of  silver  bullion. 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives  of  the  United.  States  of  America 
in  Congress  Assembled,  That  any  owner  of  silver  bullion,  the  product  of  the  mines 
of  the  United  States  or  of  ores  smelted  or  refined  in  the  United  States,  may  deposit 
the  same  at  any  coinage  mint  or  at  any  assay  office  in  the  United  States  that  the 
Secretary  of  the  Treasury  may  designate,  and  receive  therefor  Treasury  notes  here- 
inafter provided  for,  equal  at  the  date  of  deposit  to  the  net  value  of  such  silver,  at 
the  market  price  ;  such  price  to  be  determined  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury 
under  rules  and  regulations  prescribed,  based  upon  the  price  current  in  the  leading 
silver  markets  of  the  world,  but  no  deposit  consisting  in  whole  or  in  part  of  silver 
bullion  or  foreign  silver  coins  imported  into  this  country,  or  bars  resulting  from 
melted  or  refined  foreign  silver  coins,  shall  be  received  under  the  provisions  of 
this  act. 

Sec.  2.  That  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  shall  cause  to  be  prepared  Treasury 
notes  in  such  amounts  as  may  be  required  for  thf^  purpose  of  the  above  section, 
and  in  such  form  and  denominations  as  he  may  prescribe:  Provided,  That  no 
note  shall  be  of  a  denomination  less  than  one  dollar  nor  more  than  one  thousand 
dollars. 

Sec.  3.  That  the  notes  issued  under  this  act  shall  be  receivable  for  customs,  taxes, 
and  all  public  dues,  and  when  received  into  the  Treasury  may  be  reissued,  and 
such  notes,  when  held  by  any  national  banking  association,  shall  be  counted  as 
part  of  its  lawful  reserve. 


68 

Sec.  4.  That  the  notes  issued  under  the  provisions  of  this  act  shall  be  redeemed 
upon  demand  at  the  Treasury  of  the  United  States  or  at  the  office  of  an  assistant 
treasury  of  th*  United  States,  by  the  issue  of  a  certificate  of  deposit  for  the  sum 
of  the  notes  so  presented,  payable  at  one  of  the  mints  of  the  United  States,  in  an 
amount  of  silver  bullion  equal  in  value  on  the  date  of  said  certificate  to  the  num- 
ber of  dollars  stated  therein,  at  the  market  price  of  silver,  to  be  determined  as 
provided  in  section  one ;  or  such  notes  may  be  redeemed  in  gold  coin,  at  the 
option  of  the  Government :  Promdid,  That  upon  demand  of  the  holder  such  notes 
shaU  be  redeemed  in  silver  dollars. 

Sec  5.  That  when  the  market  price  of  silver,  as  determined  by  the  Secretary  of 
the  Treasury,  shall  exceed  one  dollar  for  three  hundred  and  seventy-one  and 
twenty  five  hundredths  grains  of  pure  silver,  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Secretary 
of  the  Treasury  to  refuse  to  receive  deposits  of  silver  bullion  for  the  purposes  of 
this  act:  Provided,  That  when  the  market  price  of  silver,  as  determined  in  accord- 
ance with  section  one  of  this  act,  is  one  dollar  for  three  hundred  and  seventy-one 
and  twenty-five  hundredths  grains  of  pure  silver,  it  shall  be  lawful  for  the  owner 
of  any  silver  bullion,  the  deposit  o.f  which  for  notes  is  herein  provided  for,  to  de- 
posit the  same  at  any  coinage  mint  of  t*e  United  States,  to  be  formed  into  standard 
Bilver  dollars  for  his  benefit,  as  provided  in  the  act  of  January  eighteenth,  eighteen 
hundred  and  thirty-seven. 

Skc.  6  That  the  silver  bullion  deposited  under  this  act,  represented  by  Treasury 
notes  which  have  been  redeemed  in  gold  coin  or  in  silver  dollars,  may  be  coined 
into  standard  silver  d'dlars  or  any  other  denomination  of  silver  coin  now  author- 
ized by  law,  for  the  purpose  of  replacing  the  coin  used  in  the  redemption  of  the 
notes. 

Skc.  7.  That  so  much  of  the  act  of  February  twenty-eighth,  eighteen  hundred 
and  seventy-eight,  entitled  "An  aut  to  authorize  the  coinage  of  the  standard  silver 
dollar  and  to  restore  its  legal-tender  character,"  as  requires  the  monthly  purchase 
and  coinage  into  silver  dollars  of  not  less  that  two  million  dollars  nor  more  than 
four  million  dollars'  worth  of  silver  bullion,  is  hereby  repealed. 

Sec  8.  That  any  gain  or  seigniorage  arising  from  the  coinage  which  may  be 
executed  under  the  provisions  of  this  act  shall  be  accounted  for  and  paid  into  the 
Treasury  as  provided  by  existing  law. 

Sec.  9.  Thbt  silver  bullion  received  under  the  provisions  of  this  act  shall  be  sub- 
ject to  the  requirements  of  existing  law,  and  the  regulations  of  the  mint  service,  gov- 
erning the  methods  of  receipt,  determinins:  the  amount  of  pure  silver  contained, 
and  the  amount  of  charges  or  deductions,  if  any,  to  be  made. 

Sec.  10.  That  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  collectors  of  customs  of  the  United  States 
to  stamp  with  asteel  stamp  on  every  bar  of  silver  bullion  imported  into  the  United 
States  the  word  "foreign."  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  every  assayer  or  refiner  in  the 
United  States,  or  any  other  person  or  firm,  who  may  receive  bars  of  silver  stamped 
"  foreign,"  in  case  such  bars  are  remelted  or  refined,  to  stamp  with  a  steel  stamp  the 
resulting  bars  "foreign."  In  case  bars  of  silver  stamped  "  foreign  "  are  remelted  or 
refine-i  with  other  silver  products  of  the  United  States  in  such  a  way  that  it  is  not 
possible  to  separate  the  resulting  bars  the  exact  product  of  such  foreign  silver, 
it  shall  be  the  duty  of  such  assayer  or  refiner,  or  other  person  or  firm,  to  stamp 
with  a  steel  stamp  on  an  amount  of  silver  bars  which  shall  be  equivalent  to  the 
arrount  of  foreign  silver  melted  or  refined  the  word  "  foreign."  It  shall  be  the 
duty  of  every  assaver  or  refiner  m  the  United  States,  or  any  other  person  or  firm, 
who  may  receive  coins  of  silver  of  the  coinage  of  countries  other  than  the  United 
StatPs,  in  case  such  coins  are  remelted  or  refined,  to  stamp  with  a  steel  stamp  the 
resulting  bars  "foreign."  In  case  foreign  silver  coins  are  remelted  or  refined  with 
other  silver  products  of  the  United  States  in  such  a  way  that  it  is  not  possible  to 
separate  in  the  resulting  bars  the  exact  product  of  such  foreign  silver  coins,  it 
shall  be  the  duty  of  such  assayer  or  refiner,  or  other  person  or  firm,  to  stamp,  with 
a  steel  stamp,  on  an  amount  of  silver  bars  which  shall  be  equi  valent  to  the  amount 
of  forf'ign  silver  coins  melted  or  refined,  the  word  "foreign."  Every  person  who 
fail?  to  stamp  bars  resulting  from  the  remeltingor  refining  of  foreign  silver  bulhon 
or  foreigii  silver  coins  with  the  word  "foreign,"  and  every  person  who  falsely  re- 
move's this  stamp  or  who  by  any  art,  way,  or  m^ans  mutilates  the  stamp  for  the 
purpose  of  prev*>nting  identification  of  the  bar.",  shall  be  punihhed  by  a  fine  of 
not  less  than  one  hundred  dollars  nor  more  than  one  thnusand  dollars  for  each 
bar:  Provided,  That  nothing  in  this  section  shall  be  held  to  apply  to  silver  products 


69 

extracted  by  the  processes  of  Bmelting,  amalgamation,  and  lixiviation  or  any  other 
metallurgical  process,  in  the  United  States,  from  ores  imported  from  foreign 
countries. 

Sec.  11.  That  nothing  in  this  act  shall  be  construed  to  prevent  the  purchase, 
from  time  to  time,  as  may  be  required,  of  silver  bullion  for  the  subriidiary  silver 
coinage,  not,  to  affect  the  legal-tender  quality  of  the  standard  silv«^r  dollar. 

Sec.  12.  That  a  sum  sufficient  to  carry  out  the  provisions  of  this  act  is  hereby 
appropriated,  out  of  any  money  in  the  Treasury  not  otherwise  appropria  ed. 

Sec.  13.  That,  all  act3  ani  parts  of  a'^ts  inconsistent  with  the  provisions  of  this 
act  a»e  hereby  repealed. 

Siic.  14,  That  this  act  shall  take  eflfect  thirty  daya  from  and  afcer  its  passage. 

A  minority  report  was  made,  signed  by  Mr.  Bland  and  Mr.  Wil- 
liams, recommending  free  coinage  as  proposed  in  the  following  bill: 

A  BILL  for  the  free  coinage  of  silver,  and  for  other  purposes. 

Be  it  enacifd  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  lUpreserdatiufs  of  the  United  Slates  of 
America  in  Congress  assembled,  That  from  and  after  the  passage  of  this  act  all  hold- 
ers of  silver  bullion  of  the  value  of  fifty  dollars  or  more,  standard  finene:JS,  shall 
be  entitled  to  have  the  same  coined  into  standard  silver  dollars  of  four  hundred 
and  twelve  and  a  half  grains  troy  of  standard  silver  to  the  dollar,  upon  like  terms 
and  conditions  as  gold  is  now  coined  for  private  holders;  that  the  standard  silver 
dollar  heretofore  coined  and  herein  provided  for  shall  be  the  unit  of  account  and 
etandard  of  value  in  like  manner  a«  now  provided  for  the  gold  dollar,  and  Khali  be 
a  legal  tender  for  all  debts,  public  and  private,  excc-'pt  where  otherwise  stipulated. 

Sec.  2.  That  so  much  of  the  provisions  of  the  act  of  February  twenty-eighth, 
eighteen  hundred  and  seventy  eight,  entitled  "An  act  to  authorize  the  coinage  of 
the  standard  silver  dollar  and  restore  its  legal-tender  character,"  as  provides  for 
issuing  certificates  on  the  deposit  of  silver  dollars,  shall  be  applicable  to  the  coin 
herein  named;  and  so  much  of  the  said  act  of  February  twenty- eight,  eighteen 
hundred  and  seventy-eight,  as  provides  for  tne  purchase  of  silver  bullion  to  be 
coined  monthly  into  standard  silver  dollars,  be,  and  the  same  is  hereby,  repealed. 

Sec.  3.  Tnat  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  is  hereby  authorized  to  adopt  such 
rules  and  regulations  as  may  be  necessary  to  enforce  the  provisions  of  this  act. 

Meanwhile  the  silver  question  came  under  discussion  in  the  Finance 

Committee  of  the  Senate. 

This  Committee  was  composed  of  the  following  Senators  : 

Justin  S.  Morrill,  of  Vermont,  Daniel  W.  Voorhees,  of  Indiana, 

John  Sherman,  of  Ohio,  James  B.  Beck,  of  Kentucky, 

John  P.  Jones,  of  Nevada,  Jno.  R.  McPherson,  of  Xew  Jersey, 

William  B.  Allison,  of  Iowa,  Isham  G.  Harris,  of  Tennessee, 

Nelson  VV.  Aldrich,  of  Rhode  Island,  Zebulon  B.  Vance,  of  North  Carolina. 
Frank  Hiscock,  of  New  York, 

On  the  25th  of  February,  Mr.  Jones,  of  Nevada,  reported  from  the 

Finance  Committee  to  the  Senate  the  following  as  a  substitute  for 

other  bills  before  the  committee. 

Be  it  enacted,  eic^'Vhal  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  is  hereby  directed  to  purchase 
from  time  to  time  silver  bullion  to  the  aggregate  amount  of  four  million  five  hun- 
dred thousand  dollars'  worth  in  each  month,  at  the  market  price  thereof,  not 
exceeding  one  dollar  for  tbreehundred  and  seventy-one  and  twenty-five  one  hun- 
dreths  grains  of  pure  silver,  and  also  to  purchase  sr.ch  gold  bullion  as  may  be  of- 
fered at  the  Tr  aeury  or  any  subtreasury  of  the  United  States  at  a  price  not  ex- 
ceeding one  dollar  for  twenty- three  and  twenty-two  one  hundreths  grains  of  pure 
gold,  and  to  issue  in  payment  for  t-uch  purchases  of  silver  and  gold  bullion  Treas- 
ury notes  to  be  prepared  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  in  such  form  and  of 
such  denominations,  not  less  than  one  dollar  nor  more  than  one  thousand  dollars, 
as  he  may  prescribe,  and  a  sum  sufficient  to  carry  into  effect  the  provisions  of  this 
act  is  hereby  appropriated  out  of  any  money  in  the  Treasury  not  otherwise  appro- 
priated. 


70 

Sec.  2.  That  the  Treasury  notes  issued  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  this 
act  shall  be  redeemable  on  demand,  in  lawful  money  of  the  United  States,  at  the 
Treasury  of  the  United  States,  or  at  the  office  of  any  assistant  treasurer  of  the 
United  States,  and  when  so  redeemed  shall  be  canceled  ;  and  such  Treasury  notes 
shall  be  receivable  for  customs,  taxes,  and  all  public  dues,  and  when  so  received 
may  be  re-issued ;  and  such  notes  when  held  by  any  national  banking  association 
may  be  counted  as  a  part  of  its  lawful  reserve. 

Sec.  3.  That  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  shall  coin  such  portion  of  the  gold  or 
silver  bullion  purchased  under  the  provisions  of  this  act  as  may  be  necessary  to 
provide  for  the  redemption  of  the  Treasury  notes  herein  provided  for,  and  any 
gain  or  seigniorage  arising  from  such  coinage  shall  be  accounted  for  and  paid  into 
the  Treasury. 

Sec.  4.  That  the  gold  and  silver  bullion  purchased  under  the  provisions  of  this 
act  shall  be  subject  to  the  requirements  of  existing  law,  and  the  regulations  of  the 
Mint  Service,  governing  the  methods  of  determining  the  amount  of  pure  gold  or 
pure  silver  contained,  and  the  amount  of  charges  or  deductions,  if  any,  to  be  made. 

Sec.  5.  That  so  much  of  the  act  of  February  twenty-eight,  eighteen  hundred  and 
seventy-eight,  entitled  "An  act  to  authorize  the  coinage  of  the  standard  silver  dol- 
lar and  to  restore  its  legal  tender  character,"  as  requires  the  monthly  purchase  and 
coinage  of  the  same  into  silver  dollars  of  not  less  than  two  million  dollars  nor 
more  than  four  million  dollars'  worth  of  silver  bullion,  is  hereby  repealed. 

Sec.  6.  That  this  act  shall  take  effect  thirty  days  from  and  after  its  passage. 

Meanwhile  petitions  from  all  parts  of  the  country  asking  for  the 
free  coinage  of  silver  were  presented  in  both  Houses. 

The  bills  as  presented  by  their  respective  committees  to  the  House 
and  Senate  contained  provisions  differing  widely,  which,  from  a  par- 
tisan standpoint,  it  was  important  to  harmonize.  The  differences 
were  made  .the  subject  of  a  joint  caucus  by  the  Kepublicans  of 
the  two  Houses.  The  disagreement  was  principally  over  the  bullion 
redemption  feature  of  the  House  bill,  and  on  this  point  no  agree- 
ment was  reached,  as  certain  of  the  Western  Senators,  led  by  Senator 
Teller,  refused  to  assent  to  this  provision  of  the  Treasury  scheme. 

The  provisions  agreed  upon,  however,  by  a  majority  of  those  at- 
tending the  caucus  were  incorporated  in  a  new  bill,  which  was  intro- 
duced in  the  House  by  Mr.  Conger^  April  24th,  and  referred  to  the 
Committee  on  Coinage,  Weights  and  Measures.  The  bill  was  there 
amended  so  as  to  make  the  purchase  $4,500,000  worth  instead  of 
4,500,000  ounces,  as  in  the  first  caucus  bill,  and  making  notes  issued 
therefor  redeemable  in  ' '  coin ' '  instead  of  ' '  lawful  money. ' '  The  bill 
as  amended  was  offered  in  the  House  by  Mr. Conger,  June  5th ,  as  a  sub- 
stitute for  the  original  committee  bill,  which  had  been  previously  re- 
ported to  the  House.  To  this  substitute  three  amendments  were  agreed 
upon,  Avhich  were  all  that  could  be  pending,  under  the  rules,  at  any 
one  time.  A  rule  was  formulated  by  Messrs.  Reed,  McKinley,  and 
Cannon,  of  the  Committee  on  Rules,  and  reported  to  the  House  by  Mr. 
McKinley,  which  cut  off  all  amendments  except  the  three  which 
were  agreed  upon  in  caucus.  But  one  adverse  motion  could  be 
made,   and  that  was   to  recommit   the   bill   to   the  Committee  on 


71 

Joinage^  Weights  and  Measures  with  instructions  to  report  back  a 
bill  for  free  coinage.  This  motion  was  made  by  Mr.  Bland.  There- 
fore, when  the  previous  question  was  ordered  it  was  made  to  cover 
the  amendments  agreed  upon,  which  were  all  that  could  be  made 
imder  the  rules,  leaving  the  motion  to  recommit  as  the  only  motion 
that  could  be  made  looking  to  further  amending  the  bill.  So  no 
opportunity  was  offered  for  a  vote  to  strike  out  the  bullion  redemption 
feature,  which  would  any  time  have  carried  by  a  large  majority. 


CHAPTER  VII. 


The  Caucus  Bill  Considered  in  the  House. 

When  the  House  was  called  to  order  Thursday,  June  5th,  Mr, 
McKinley,  from  the  Committee  on  Rules,  offered  the  following  reso- 
lution, on  which  he  demanded  the  previous  question  : 

Resolved,  That  upon  the  passage  of  this  resolution  the  House  proceed  to  coa- 
sider  House  bill  5381,  and  said  consideration  shall  continue  until  Saturday,  June 
7,  when  the  previous  question  shall  be  considered  as  ordered  at  3  o'clock  P.  M., 
on  the  bill  and  pending  amendments,  and  that  the  House  meet  at  11  o'clock  oa 
Friday  and  Saturday  next. 

In  the  brief  discussion  on  this  vote,  Mr.  Blount  said  :   '^  I  hope  the 

gentleman  from  Ohio  will  allow  me  to  offer  an  amendment."     Mr. 

McKinley  declined  to  yield  for  an  amendment,  and  insisted  on  the 

previous  question.     The  previous  question  was  ordered,  when  forty 

minutes  were  allowed  under  the  rules  for  debate  on  the  resolution. 

Respecting  the  proposed  vote,  Mr.  Blount  said: 

Mr.  Speaker,  the  proposition  in  this  order  as  reported  from  the  Committee  on 
Rules  provides  that  the  previous  question  shall  be  ordered  at  3  o'clock  on  Saturday, 
and  that  the  sessions  of  the  House  on  to-morrow  and  next  day  shall  begin  at  11 
o'clock,  which  is  equivalent  to  three  days'  discussion,  assuming  the  day  to  end  at 
5  o'clock.  To  that  I  have  no  complaint  to  make.  I  think  this  side  of  the  House, 
if  this  were  all,  would  accept  it  as  the  best  arrangement  possibly  they  could  make  ; 
but  it  goes  further.  I  am  informed  that  the  chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Coin- 
age, Weights  and  Measures  will  be  allowed  to  offer  all  the  amendments  which  are 
admissible  under  the  rules  of  the  House ;  that  when  these  are  made  there  will  be 
left  no  opportunity  on  the  part  of  the  minority  to  offer  any  amendment  on  any 
proposition.  There  will  be  left  to  the  minority  side  of  the  House  no  opportunity 
to  ask  this  House  to  vote  on  free  coinage. 

Mr.  Bland  said: 

I  have  no  question  whatever  in  my  mind  that  if  there  was  a  fair  opportunity  for 
debate  and  amendment  of  this  bill  a  large  majority  of  this  House  would  be  found 
in  favor  of  the  unlimited  coinage  of  silver.  I  suppose  there  is  no  doubt  in  the 
House  or  in  the  mind  of  any  member  of  it  that  that  is  the  fact.  In  order  to  pre- 
vent that  fact  from  appearing  upon  the  records  of  this  House  it  is  proposed,  by  a 
gag  rule,  not  only  to  gag  the  Republican  members  of  this  body  who  are  in  favor  of 
free  coinage,  but  also  nearly  the  whole  Democratic  party  here,  because,  with  about 
fifteen  or  twenty  exceptions,  all  of  ns  on  this  side  of  the  House  are  in  favorof  free 
coinage. 

Mr.  Speaker,  it  was  agreed  in  the  Committee  on  Coinage,  Weights  and  Measures;, 
it  was  the  understanding  in  that  committee  when  the  bills  were  reported,  that  the 
free-coinage  bill,  the  substitute  that  has  been  reported  here  by  the  minority,  should 
be  voted  upon  in  this  House.  That  would  have  given  fair  play,  a  fair  opportunity 
for  intelligent  legislation.  But  now,  sir,  I  am  informed  by  the  gentleman  from 
Georgia  [Mr.  Blount]  that  this  order  prevents  not  only  the  offering  of  an  amend- 
ment like  the  proposition  for  free  coinage,  but  any  other  amendment  that  may  be 
required  to  perfect  the  bill,  unless  it  comes  from  the  Chairman  of  the  Committee 
on  Coinage,  Weights  and  Measures,  who,  up  to  this  hour,  has  shown  his  hostility 
to  every  other  bill  than  a  measure  coupling  with  it  the  demonetization  of  silver  by 
permitting  bullion  to  go  out  of  the  Treasury  as  fast  as  it  comes  in. 

Mr.  Springer  said: 

This  resolution  is  so  framed  as  to  prevent  this  side  of  the  House,  as  well  as  the 
minority  on  the  other  side  of  the  House — for,  gentlemen,  you  will  have  to  take 


73 

the  "  gag  law  "  yourselves,  as  well  as  this  side,  on  this  question,  if  you  adopt  this 
proposition — it  is  so  framed  that  no  amendment  is  to  be  allowed  in  which  the 
friends  of  he  free  coinage  of  silver  can  present  their  views  for  a  fair  vote  in  this 
House,  and  the  members  on  this  side,  as  well  as  tbe  members  from  the  North- 
western States  on  the  other  side  of  the  House,  are  completely  gagged  and  cut  ofl 
from  that  opportunity. 

Aijainst  this  I  enter  my  solemn  protest  and  denunciation.  This  action  is  in- 
tended to  prevent  the  representatives  of  the  people  from  carrying  out  the  demands 
of  the  people  on  this  question,  and  the  constituents  of  those  who  vote.for  this  reso- 
lution will  repudiate  them  at  the  polls  for  their  action.  [Applause  on  the  Demo- 
cratic side.] 

Mr.  Williams,  of  Illinois,  said: 

It  is  a  question  in  which  the  people  of  the  country  are  vitally  interested  from 
one  end  of  the  Union  to  the  other,  and  the  Representatives  on  this  floor,  a  ma- 
jority of  them  in  this  House,  are  in  favor  of  the  free  coinage  of  silver.  The  very 
fact  that  you  refuse  to  allow  a  vote  on  that  question  is  convincing  proof  before  the 
House  and  the  country  that  you  know  they  are  in  favor  of  free  coinage,  and 
you  dare  not  allow  them  to  go  on  record  on  that  question.  [Applause  on  the 
Democratic  side.]  Otherwise  why  do  you  fear  a  vote  upon  it?  Why  not  allow 
the  question  to  come  fairly  before  the  House  ? 

Mr.  Cannon  claimed  that  the  same  amendments  could  be  offered 
under  the  proposed  rule  as  without  it. 

Mr.  McKiNLEY,  replying  to  the  strictures  from  those  opposing  the- 

vote,  said: 

Mr.  Speaker,  it  is  necessary  after  the  storm  of  denunciation  that  we  have  heard 
from  the  oiher  side  of  the  House  to  return  for  a  moment  to  the  proposition  that  is 
really  before  us,  and  the  meaning,  and  purpose,  and  effect  of  that  proposition,  if  it 
shall  be  adopted  by  a  majority  of  this  House.  It  is  a  resolution,  Mr.  Speaker,  to 
give  to  the  House  of  Representatives  an  opportunity  to  pass  some  silver  legislation, 
and  to  give  to  the  country  a  silver  bill  which  the  majority  of  this  House  believe 
will  be  fully  responsive  to  the  general  sentiment  of  the  country.  [Applause  on 
Republican  side].  It  is,  Mr.  Speaker,  to  give  to  the  House  of  Representatives  an 
opportunity  to  pass  a  bill  which  shall  take  all  of  the  silver  bullion  of  the  United 
States — all  of  the  silver  product  of  the  United  States — and  utilize  that  silver  bullion 
for  monetary  purposes  and  put  it  in  circulation  for  the  movement  of  the  business  of 
the  country.  It  is  to  give  to  the  people  of  the  country,  not  $2,000,000  monthly, 
but  to  give  them  four  and  one-half  miilions  monthly,  or  two  and  one-half  millions 
more  than  what  is  now  provided  by  the  existing  law. 

Mr.  Blount  asked : 

Why  should  not  my  friend  consent  to  a  single  amendment  on  the  single  propo-^ 
sition,  that  of  free  coinage,  and  have  a  vote  upon  it? 

Mr.  McKINLEY.  The  gentleman  cannot  drive  me  from  my  position.  [De- 
risive laughter  on  the  Democratic  side.]  The  House  of  Representatives  are  here 
to  do  public  business.  And  you  gentlemen  on  the  other  side  of  the  House  could 
not  have  been  very  anxious  for  free  coinage  when  for  four  long  years,  when  you  had 
control  of  the  Houee  of  Representatives,  you  never  were  able  to  pass  a  bill  upon 
that  subject.     [Applause  on  the  Republican  side  of  the  House. 

*  *  *  -f  »  *  * 

Mr.  Speaker,  talk  about  throttling  the  will  of  the  minority  by  the  majority  in 
theHouse  of  Representatives.  Why,  one  man  up  at  the  White  House  a  few  years 
ago  silenced  the  majority  in  the  Forty-ninth  and  Fiftieth  Congresses.  [Applause 
on  the  Republican  side] 

Mr.  McCO.VIAS.  1  want,  in  the  little  time  that  is  accorded  me,  to  correct  the 
statement  of  the  gentleman  from  Illinois  [Mr  Springer].  He  made  a  statement 
here  as  to  the  vote.  Now,  in  the  Forty-sixth  Congress,  where  there  were  forty- 
two  Democratic  Senators  and  thirty-three  Republican  Senators,  free  coinase  was 
reported  adversely  from  the  Committee  on  Finance  by  Mr.  Bayard  on  Februarv  3,, 
1880 — that  the  bill  for  free  coinage  ought  not  to  pass.     [Applause  on  the  Republican. 


74 


aide.]  Again,  in  the  Forty -ninth  Congress,  under  Mr.  Cleveland's  administration, 
there  was  an  immense  Democratic  majority  in  this  House.  I  hold  in  my  hand 
the  vote  of  that  tremendous  Democratic  majority  upon  the  proposition  in  a  bill 
which  was  submitted  for  free  coinage;  and  when  (with  almost  two-thirds  your 
■way)  yon  had  a  chance  to  pass  it  in  this  House — the  vote,  when  it  came  up  on  the 
28th  of  April,  1886,  wfs  126  for  free  coinage  and  163  against  free  coinage,  and  68 
Democrats  voted  dead  against  free  coinage. 
Mr,  BLAND.    And  100  voted  for  it. 

The  resolution  was  then  adopted  by  a  vote  of  120  yeas  to  117  nays, 

as  follows : 

YEAS— 120. 


Adams, 

Cheadle, 

Harmer, 

Moffitt, 

Simonds. 

Allen,  Mich, 

Clark,  Wis. 

Haugen, 

Moore,  N.  H. 

Smith,  W.  Va. 

Atkinson,  Pa. 

Cogswell, 

Henderson,  111 

.  Morey, 

Smyser, 

Atkinson,  W.  Va. 

Coleman, 

Henderson,  la, 

,  Morrill, 

Snider, 

Baker, 

Comstock, 

Hitt, 

Morse, 

Stephenson, 

Bayne, 

Conger, 

Hopkins, 

Mudd, 

Stivers, 

Beckwith, 

Craig, 

Houk, 

O'Donnell, 

Stockbridge, 

Belden, 

Dalzell, 

Kennedy, 

O'Neill,  Pa. 

Struble, 

Belknap, 

Darlington, 

Kerr,  Iowa, 

Osborne, 

Sweney, 

Bergen, 

Dingley, 

Ketcham, 

Payne, 

Taylor,  111. 

Bingham, 

Dolliver, 

Kinsey, 

Pay son, 

Taylor,  Tenn. 

Bliss, 

Dorsey, 

Lacey, 

Perkins, 

Taylor,  E.  B. 

Blount, 

Dunnell, 

La  Follette, 

Pickler. 

Thomas, 

Brewer, 

Evans, 

Laws, 

Post, 

Thompson, 

Brosius, 

Farquhar, 

Lind, 

Raines. 

Turner,  Kans. 

Brower, 

Flnley, 

Lodge, 

Randall, 

Yan  Pchaick, 

Browne,  Va. 

Flick, 

Mason, 

Ray, 

AVade, 

Buchanan,  N.  J. 

Flood, 

McComas, 

Reed,  la. 

Walker,  Mass. 

Burrows, 

Frank, 

McCord, 

Reyburn, 

Wickham, 

Barton, 

Gear, 

McCormick, 

Rife, 

Williams,  Ohio, 

Butter  worth, 

Gifford, 

McDuffie, 

Rockwell, 

Wilson,  Ky. 

Caldwell, 

Greenhalge, 

McKinley, 

Rowell, 

Wilson,  Wash. 

Cannon, 

Hall, 

Miles, 

Russell, 

Wright, 

Caswell 

Hansbrough, 

Milliken, 

NAYS-117. 

Scull, 

Yardley. 

Abbott, 

Cobb, 

Hayes, 

Moore,  Tex. 

Skinner, 

Alderson, 

Connell, 

Haynes, 

Morgan, 

Springer, 

Anderson,  Kans. 

Cooper,  Ind. 

Heard, 

Morrow, 

Stewart,  Tex. 

Bankhead, 

Cowles, 

Hemphill, 

Mutchler, 

Stockdale, 

Barnes, 

Orisp, 

Henderaon.N.C  Gates. 

Stone,  Ky. 

Bartine, 

Culberson,  Tex.  Herbert, 

O'Ferrall, 

Stone,  Mo. 

Barwig, 

Dargan, 

Hermann, 

O'Neall,  Ind. 

Tarsney, 

Biggs. 

Davidson, 

Holman, 

O'Neill,  Maes. 

Tillman, 

Blanchard, 

DeHaven, 

Kelley, 

Outhwaite, 

TownsendjColo. 

Bland, 

Dockfry, 

Kilgore, 

Owens,  Ohio, 

Tracey, 

Breckinridge,  Ark 

.  Dunphy, 

Lane, 

Parrett, 

Tucker, 

Brickner, 

Edmunds, 

Lanham, 

Paynter, 

Turner,  Ga. 

Brookshire, 

Elliott. 

Lester,  Ga. 

Peel, 

A'andever, 

Brown,  J.  B. 

Ellis, 

Lewis, 

Perry, 

Yaux, 

Brunner, 

Enloe, 

Magner, 

Pierce, 

Walker,  Mo. 

Buchanan,  Va. 

Featherston, 

Manser, 

Quinn, 

Waehington, 

Buckalew, 

Fitch, 

Martin,  Ind. 

Reilly, 

Whitthorne, 

Bynum, 

Flower, 

McAdoo, 

Richardson, 

Wike,; 

Candler,  Ga. 

Forney, 

McCarthy, 

Robertson, 

Will  cox, 

Caruth, 

Fowler, 

McClammy, 

Rogers, 

Williams,  III. 

Chipman, 

Funston, 

McClellan, 

Rowland, 

Wilson,  W.  Va. 

Clancey, 

Goo<l  night, 

McCrearv, 

Sayers, 

Clarke,  Ala. 

Grimes, 

McRae,  ' 

Seney, 

■Clunie, 

Hatch, 

Montgomery, 

Shively, 

7.) 

Before  debate  began,  and  after  the  reading  of  the  bill  (H.  R.  5381) 
as  originally  reported  from  the  Committee  on  Coinage,  Weights  and 
Measures,  Mr.  Conger  offered  the  substitute  already  referred  to,  and 
known  as  the  caucus  bill,  which  was  then  tead,  when  Mr.  McComas 
was  recognized  to  offer  an  amendment.  Mr.  Taylor,  of  Illinois,  was 
•ext  recognized  to  offer  a  second  amendment,  and  Mr.  McDonald  to 

;ffer  a  third,  which  exhausted  the  right,  under  the  rules,  to  amend. 
''/Lr.  Bland  sought  recognition  to  offer  an  amendment  but  was  denied 
;he  floor  for  this  purpose.     Thus  in  spite  of  the  claims  made  by  Mr. 

Jannon  and  Mr.  McKinley  when  the  ''gag  "  rule  was  under  dis- 
lussion,  no  amendments  were  allowed  to  be  offered  except  those  pre- 
viously agreed  upon  by  the  majority. 

Debate  on  the  silver  question  followed  until  Saturday.  Many  able 
-peeches  were   delivered  on  both  sides,  most  of  which   have  been 

printed  and  circulated.     Space  here  will   permit  only  brief  extracts 

•earing  directly  on  contested  features  of  the  bill. 

Mr.  Payson,  of  Illinois,  expressed  on  the  floor  of  the  House  the 
-eutiments  of  enough  Republicans  to  have  stricken  out  in  the  House 
ihe  bullion  provision  by  an  overwhelming  majority.     He  said: 

In  the  Forty-seventh  Congress  I  had  the  honor  to  serve  upon  the  Committee 
on  Coinage,  Weights  and  Measures.  Before  that  committee  was  a  bill  providing 
Jor  the  suspension  of  the  silver  coinage.  My  colleagues  upon  that  committee  and 
royself  gave  the  matter  as  thorough  investigation,  perhaps, as  the  average  of  Con- 
>;;re88ional  committees  give  to  an  important  subject,  and  I  had  the  honor  in  that 
■^Jongress  to  make  the  report  for  the  committee,  against  the  suspension  of  silver 
(ioinage,  and  to  submit  some  views  which  I  then  entertained,  which  were  indorsed 
by  the  committee  and  which  I  have  entertained  from  that  time  until  now.  Those 
views  were  the  result  of  as  careful  and  candid  an  investigation  of  that  question, 
which  was  then  new  to  me,  as  I  have  ever  given  to  any  subject.  The  views  I 
4hen  entertained  and  now  entertain  were  in  harmony  with  what  I  believe  to  be 
the  principles  announced  by  the  last,  Republican  convention,  held  in  the  city  of 
Ohicago.  I  remember  as  an  auditor  in  that  convention  hearing  the  distinguished 
yentleman  from  Ohio  [Mr.  McKinley],  the  chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Ways 
E.nd  Means,  read  the  platform  in  the  great  Auditorium  building,  in  which  that 
vonventioa  was  held.  I  do  not  forget,  when  the  ringing  words  came  from  his  lips 
lo  an  audience  then  conscious,  as  a  matter  of  recent  recollection,  of  the  position  of 
the  Cleveland  administration  in  regard  to  silver,  the  response  of  that  audience 
when  he  read  the  declaration  : 

*'  We,  the  Kepublican  party,  believe  in  the  use  of  gold  and  silver  as  money  and 
we  denounce  the  present  Democratic  administration  for  its  hostility  to  silver,"  etc. 

The  words  that  thus  fell  from  his  lips,  as  he  read  that  platform  to  that  as- 

-embled  multitude,  met  with  an  enthusiastic  response  that  I   shall  never  forget 

dO  long  as  I  live.  The  words  uttered  expressed  the  sentiments  of  that  magnificent, 

representative  Republican  audience.    I  did  not  then  thiuk,  Mr.  Speaker,  that 

within  about  two  years  from  that  time  I  should  be  asked  to  vote  in  the  House  of 

'epresentatives  for  a  bill  coming  from  a  Committee  on  Coinage,.  Weights  and 

'ieasures,  a  majority  of  which  was  composed  of  members  of  the  same  political 

artj'  to  which  I  belong,  which  not  only  praciicalh/,  ay,  absolutely,  demonetizes  silver  a^ 

I  metal  nnd  establishes  upon  the  statutes  of  the  Union  a  gold  standard,  and  not  that  only, 

-■'^t  in  addition  to  that  wipes  from  the  statute-book  the  only  legislation  that  we  have  for  the 

Anage  of  the  standard  silver  dollar.    [Applause.  ] 


76 

I  believe  in  the  doctrine  which  was  announced  by  the  Republican  national 
convention;  I  stand  for  it  here  and  now;  and  I  express  the  confident  belief  that 
out  of  ihe  debate  which  is  goiiig  on  here  and  out  of  the  consideration  of  this  ques- 
tion Mill  conae  a  bill  from  a  Republican  House  of  Representatives  and  a  Repub- 
lican Senate  which  in  letter  aijd  spirit  will  be  up  to  the  declarations  of  the  party 
at  its  last  national  convention  and  meet  the  public  demands. 

******* 

As  Republicans  know,  I  have  opposed  these  bills.  I  oppose  this  bill  No.  9678 
because,  in  the  firs*,  place,  it  proposes  to  treat  silver  simplv  and  purely  as  a  mer- 
chantable commodity  and  to  place  upon  the  statute-books,  until  Congress  shall 
change  it,  an  open  declaration  that  gold,  and  gold  only,  shall  be  the  standard  recog- 
nized by  the  supreme  law  of  the  land  as  the  mnasure  of  values. 

******* 

*  *  *  I  am  opposed  to  this  bill  because  it  repeals  the  only  provision  in  the 
statutes  requiring  tlie  coinagfi  of  the  standard  silver  dollar.    *    *    * 

I  oppose  it,  Mr.  Speaker,  fot  another  reason,  which  waf,  perhaps,  involved  to  a- 
certain  extent  in  a  statement  I  made  a  few  moments  aeo,  and  which  is  retained  in 
the  bill  now  upon  the  Speaker's  table  as  a  su^^stitute  for  this  bill,  and  upon  which 
a  vote  will  first  be  taken.  That  is  the  feature  of  bullion  redemption  of  the  Treasury 
notes  thus  outstanding.    *    *    * 

But,  Mr.  Speaker,  I  expect  to  give  this  substitute  my  support — in  a  contin- 
gency. I  hope  the  opportunity  may  be  presented  in  some  form  or  other  under  the 
rules  of  the  House,  or  under  the  special  order,  by  which  a  motion  to  strike  out 
the  "bullion-redemption"  feature  of  the  bill  may  be  submitted  to  the  House  for 
consideration.  I  say  I  hope  that  will  be  done.  I  hope  that  some  method  will  be 
devieed  by  which  it  may  be  done.  But  if  it  fails  and  it  Is  impossible  to  get  it  out 
of  the  bill,  I  shall  still  give  the  substitute  bill  my  support,  reluctantly,  I  confess, 
Vjecaase  I  do  not  believe  in  voting  for  something  to  which  I  am  opposed,  and 
therefore  I  do  it  with  regret,  but  for  this  reason :  I  believe  in  the  necessity  of  some 
kind  of  legirtlation  on  this  important  subject,  and  I  am  confidently  advised  and 
expect,  upon  assurances  that  I  rely  upon,  as  stable  and  as  trustworthy  as  any  pre- 
dictions of.  men,  that  if  the  bill  shall  pass  here,  even  in  its  present  form,  the  matter 
will  be  corrected  elsewhere. 

Mr.  REILLY.    That  will  eliminate  the  most  serious  objection,  in  my  opinion. 

Mr.  PAYSON.  Yes,  I  believe  it  will  be  so  done.  I  would  eay,  therefore,  that 
I  do  not  vote  without  expectation,  without  belief;  in  other  words,  if  I  vote  for 
this  substitute  I  do  it  with  the  belief  that  it  is  not  a  finality  with  reference  to  this 
matter;  (and  let  me  be  understood)  if  I  did  not  so  believe,  this  substitute  would 
never  receive  my  support  on  this  floor. 

Mr.  BYNUM.    Suppose  there  is  no  amendment  in  the  Senate  ? 

Mr.  PAYSON  As  I  have  said,  I  have  no  more  doubt  that  there  will  be  then, 
that  I  am  standing  here,  from  assurances  that  I  have  had  from  gentlemen  on  both 
Bides — perhaps  I  ought  not  to  say  where. 

Other  Republicans  were  equally  pointed  in  thejr  opposition  to  the 
bullion-redemption  clause  of  the  bill,  and  many  voted  for  it  with  the 
declaration  that  they  expected  it  to  be  so  amended  in  the  Senate  as  to 
strike  out  the  bullion-redemption  feature. 

Mr.  Connell,  of  Nebraska, as  a  Republican,  protested  warmly  against 
"  the  gag  in  free  speech  hy  lohich  they  prevented  a  fair  discussion,, 
or  the  right  to  propose  honest  amendments." 

But  the  position  of  Mr.  Connell  and  others  will  be  best  shown  by 

the  following  quotations  from  Mr.  Connell's  speech: 

While  a  considerable  number  like  myself  were  in  favor  of  free  and  unlimited 
coinage  of  silver  we  stood  ready  to  compromise  on  a  measure  that  would  eliminate 
from  the  present  bill  its  bullion:redemplion  proviso,  which  degrades  and  continues 
to  demonetize  silver  and  makes  mere  warehouse  receipts  out  of  the  Treasury  notes 
authorized  to  be  issued.    It  looked  at  one  time  as  though  this  might  be  done. 


77 

I  do  not  propose  to  jrive  away  any  secrets  of  the  caucus ;  I  do  not  propose  to  tell 
aay  tales  out  of  school ;  I  only  repaat  what  has  been  a  matter  of  general  publica- 
tion in  the  public  press,  when  I  say  that  a  nunaber  of  amendments,  onb  of  which 
eliminated  from  this  bill  its  objectionable  bullion  clause,  were  oflf'^red  by  the  gen- 
tleman from  Ohio  [Mr.  McKinley],  and  probably  would  have  been  accepted  as  sat- 
ififactory  to  all  the  members  on  this  side  of  the  House,  but  for  the  objections  andpro- 
U'sts  of  the.  Speaker, 

I  would  have  been  very  glad  to  have  seen  a  silver  bill  introduced  and  put  through 
this  House  purely  as  a  Republican  measure.  This  might  have  been  done  had  gen- 
tlemen on  this  sideof  the  House  heeded  the  timely  suggestions  of  the  distinguished 
and  able  gentleman  from  Ohio  [Mr.  McKinley],  and  accepted  the  amendments 
which  he  proposed  in  a  spirit  of  compromise.  Wtiile  in  favor  of  the  free  and  unlim- 
ited coinage  of  silver,  I,  with  other  members  of  similar  views,  would  have  been 
willing  to  accept  this  bill  with  the  amendments  proposed,  believing  that  time 
would  justify  our  belief  that  with  the  brand  of  demonetization  removed,  the  price 
-of  bullion  would  soon  reach  |1  for  371.25  grains  of  pure  silver,  and  result  practi- 
cally in  free  and  unlimited  coinage. 

Mr.  Kelly,  of  Kansas,  made  a  short  but  strong  speech,  not  only 

defining  his  own  position  but  pointedly  stating  the  whole  question, 

and  especially  the  objection  to  bullion  redemption. 

Mr.  KELLY  said : 

Mr.  SpjiAKER :  I  am  in  favor  of  the  free  coinage  of  silver.  This  bill,  as  I  look  at 
it,  is  a  jugglery  of  words  to  demonetize  what  is  left  of  silver  coinage.  Under  the 
law  as  we  have  it  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  at  present  price  of  silver,  can  coin 
five  and  a  half  millions  a  month  ;  he  is  compelled  to  coin  two  millions  a  month. 
Under  this  bill  he  is  not  compelled  to  coin  any,  and  as  under  present  law  he  has 
never  coined  any  more  than  he  wns  compelled  to,  it  is  likelv  un<ier  this  law  he 
aever  would  coin  any.  This  bill  is  in  the  intpresi  of  the  creditor  class ;  it  is  against 
the  debtor  class.  It  is  an  abandonment  of  the  pledge  made  in  tne  Republican 
platform  upon  which  this  Admioistration  came  into  power. 

I  shall  vote  to  recommit  it  to  the  committee,  with  instructions  in  favor  of  free 
coinage;  if  that  proposition  fails  I  shall  vote  against  the  bill,  and  I  shall  do  it 
with  the  full  knowledge  that  a  majority  of  this  House  would,  if  opportunity  were 
given  it,  vote  for  free  coinage ;  and  I  shall  do  it  with  the  hope  tliat  <  pportunity 
will  be  given  it.  I  shall  do  it  with  the  knowledge  tbat  ttie  common  people  of  this 
•ountry  understand  this  question,  and  with  the  further  knowledge  that  they  de- 
mand free  coinage  of  silver. 

********** 

Mr.  Speaker,  from  the  foundation  of  this  Government  up  to  1873,  the  coinage  of 
silver  and  gold  as  money  in  the  ratio  of  1  to  16  stood  on  an  exact  equality. 
The  coinage  of  both  was  free  and  unlimited,  and  when  coined  by  the  Government 
was  money,  and  a  legal  tender  for  debts.  In  1873,  when  silver  war^  demonetized, 
the  silver  in  a  silver  dollar  before  coined  was  worth  a  trifle  more  than  the  gold  in 
a  gold  dollar  before  coined.  No  tne  asked  that  it  be  demonetized  ;  no  one  has 
since  been  found  who  knew  it  was  going  to  be;  no  one  has  since  been  founH  who, 
when  he  voted  for  the  act  demonetizing  silver,  knew  that  the  act  contained  any 

such  provision  ;  the  President  who  approved  the  act  did  not  know  it, 

********** 

Mr.  Speaker,  a  frank  statement  is  always  to  be  admired.  The  gentleman  from 
Massachusetts  [Mr.  Walker]  in  his  able  and  lengthy  argument  in  the  advocacy 
of  this  bill,  says  there  is  gold  coin  enough  in  the  world  to  do  the  businei-s  of  the 
world,  and  that  there  is  gold  coin  enough  in  this  country  to  do  the  buf-iness  of 
this  couQtry.  From  his  standpoint  he  is  coaeistent ;  were  I  in  favor  of  a  gold 
standard  alone,  this  bill  would  certainly  recei>'e  my  support.  Tais  bill  does  what 
Grover  Cleveland  advised  Congrei-s  to  do,  it  absolutely  demonetizps  silver,  except 
it  be  already  coined;  it  repeals  ttie  law  we  now  have,  requiring  the  Secretary  of 
the  Treasury  to  coin  $2,000,000  worth  a  month,  or  at  his  discretion  to  coin  $4,0(j0,- 
000  worth  per  month.     * 

This  bill  degrades  silver,  makes  the  conditions  so  that  under  the  bill  silver  can 
never  be  equal  with  gold,  and  then  facetiously  says,  when  it  shall  be  equal  silver 


78 

coinage  shall  be  free ;  and  at  this  point  my  humorous  friend  from  Maryland  [Mr, 
McCoMAs],  who  favors  the  bill,  offers  his  amendment,  which  in  eflfect  says,  when 
this  impossibility  shall  occur  then  silver  purchases  shall  cease. 

^^  *  ■*  -X-  *  -x-  ■» 

Mr.  Speaker,  I  know  not  how  well  the  people  of  the  East  have  considered,  dis- 
cussed, and  studied  this  question,  but  so  far  as  the  people  of  the  great  State  that  I 
have  the  honor  in  part  to  humbly  represent  on  this  floor,  there  is  scarcely  a 
school-hou^e  out  of  the  ten  thousand  within  her  borders  that  has  not  been  the 
forum  of  discussion  and  debate  on  this  question.  It  has  been  handled  in  all  its 
phases  and  the  verdict  has  been  unanimf)U3  and  emphatic  that  the  act  demonetiz- 
ing silver  in  1873  was  a  great  outrage  on  the  debtor  class ;  that  it  has  pilfered  and 
is  yet  pilfering  from  the  debtor,  and  handing  to  the  creditor. 

The  following  is  from  Mr.  Funston's  speech,  in  the  same  line : 

The  bill  evidently  is  a  compromise  between  the  East  and  the  West,  and  follow- 
ing the  rule  of  all  other  compromises,  is  unsatisfactory  to  very  many.  And  in  fact, 
Mr.  Speaker,  after  listening  to  this  discussion  for  two  days,  I  have  come  to  the  con- 
clusion that  were  all  who  have  apologized  for  the  bill  in  favor  of  recommitting  it 
to  the  committee  with  instructions  to  bring  in  arfree-coinage  bill,  we  would  have 
a  free-coinage  measure  passed  by  this  House  before  another  week.  I,  for  one,  am 
ready  and  willing  and  shall  at  the  proper  time  vote  to  recommit  this  bill,  with  in- 
structions to  bring  in  a  free-coinage  measure  ;  and  if  gentlemen  on  this  side  of  the 
House  who  have  been  apologizing  for  this  bill  will  vote  with  me  we  will  have  free 
coinage.     [Applause  on  the  Democratic  side.] 

Mr.  Williams,  in  summing  up  his  speech,  said : 

Mr.  Speaker,  the  Windom  bill  and  substitutes  oflFered  by  the  Republican  caucua 
are  wrong  in  principle,  and  no  number  of  amendments  will  make  either  equal  to 
a  free-coinage  bill  in  my  judgment.  I  have  already  said  that  our  farmers  feel  a 
special  interest  in  the  free  coinage  of  silver.  It  must  be  remembered  that  in  large 
cities,  where  banks  are  plentiful,  and  deposits  have  a  multiplied  use,  much  of  the 
business  is  transacted  by  the  use  of  checks  and  other  substitutes  for  money,  while 
in  agricultural  districts  the  small  dealings  of  farmers  are  carried  on  in  money  and 
require  the  actual  presence  and  use  of  money  in  the  trade.  Hence  a  contraction 
of  the  currency  is  more  quickly  and  severely  felt  among  the  farmers.  Money  is 
the  life-blood  of  the  nation,  and  what  we  want  is  more  of  this  life-blood  in  circu- 
lation. 

The  following  is  from  an  able  speech  by  Mr.  Post,  of  Illinois : 

When  Warren  Hastings,  arraigned  for  cruelly  plundering  the  defenseless  peo- 
ple of  India,  reflected  upon  the  constant  demands  made  upon  him  by  the  greed 
of  the  East  India  Company  and  the  limitless  power  he  had  exercised  as  the  gov- 
ernor of  India,  he  naturally  exclaimed  that  he  was  amazed  at  his  own  moderation. 
When  the  owners  of  realized  wealth  consider  how  completely  the  monetary  legis- 
lation of  modern  civilized  nations  has  been  conceded  to  them  as  representatives 
of  great  commercial  interests,  they  might  well  exclaim  that  they  wonder  at  their 
own  moderation. 

******* 

The  FuNDftOLDEBS  AND  Bankees'  Plot. 

In  1868,  European  bankers  estimated  that  if  the  single  gold  standard  could  be 
universally  introduced  the  circulating  medium  of  the  world  then  existing  would 
suffer  a  sudden  reduction  of  38  J  per  cent,  for  which  there  could  be  no  compensa- 
tion in  an  increased  supply  of  gold,  and  therefore  the  value  of  gold  would  rise. 
The  objection  to  this  course  was  then  clearly  pointed  out,  that  as  an  increase  of 
circulation  is  always  beneficial,  so  the  destruction  of  a  large  part  of  the  existing 
circulating  medium  would  be  injurious  to  the  true  interests  of  mankind — a  blow 
to  the  advance  of  civilization  and  to  social  progress. 

How  did  it  happen  that  the  people  of  the  United  States,  who  are  as  keenly 
alive  to  their  own  interests  and  who  so  carefully  watch  legislation,  permitted  the 
demonetization  of  silver  and  the  adoption  of  the  gold  standard?  The  truth  is 
they  did  not  know  what  had  been  done  ;  legislators  did  not  know  what  they  were 


79 

doing.  The  demonetization  of  silver  was  the  most  peculiar  legislative  transaction; 
that  ever  occurred  in  this  country,  and  it  is  to  be  hoped  that  no  similar  traneac- 
tion  will  be  attempted  in  the  future. 

If  any  one  connected  with  it  appreciated  what  its  effect  would  be  it  was  not 
avowed,  and  it  is  charitable  to  suppose  that  no  member  of  the   Congress  which 

Saseed  the  law  hadthe  slightest  idea  that  the  law  would  create  consternation  and 
istrust  throughout  the  civilized  world,  and  that  within  twenty  years  the  most 
important  question  before  Congress  would  be  how  safely  to  restore  the  coinage  law 
as  it  existed  prior  to  1873. 

Silver  the  Standahd  Pkioe  to  1873. 

In  1873,  as  an  officer  abroad,  it  was  my  duty  to  certify  to  the  value  of  a  depre- 
ciated paper  currency  in  the  standard  coin  of  the  United  States.  That  standard 
was,  and  always  had  been,  from  the  beginning  of  the  Government,  "  the  American 
or  Spanish  silver  dollar."  I  have  mentioned  the  United  States  in  a  list  of  double- 
standard  countries  because  we  have  free  coinage  of  gold  and  silver,  and  the  popular 
opinion  placed  it  there.  But  the  only  legal  standard  of  value  was  the  "American 
or  Spanish  silver  dollar,"  and  every  certificate  filed  in  our  custom-houses  prior  to 
1873  proves  that  fact.  The  gold  dollar  wasL  a  legal  tender  just  like  the  greenback, 
but  had  the  advantage  of  the  greenback  in  also  having  a  foreign  exchange  value, 

Mr.    Townsend,  of  Colorado,    spoke   strongly   for   free   coinage, 

saying  : 

It  will  be  noted  that  silver  bullion  stays  with  the  commodities,  and  to  every  one^ 
except  creditors  and  those  having  fixed  incomes,  it  is  evident  that  the  prosperity 
of  the  country  will  not  return  and  the  downward  course  of  prices  will  not  be 
arrested  until  silver  is  restored  to  its  money  power,  and  the  bimetallic  standard 
shall  bring  a  steady  measure  of  value  instead  of  the  present  constantly  appreciating 
standard  of  gold. 

Mr.  Steel,  explaining  the  effect  of  the  act  of  1873  on  mortgage 

debts,  said: 

When  he  made  the  mortgage,  one-half  bushel  of  wheat,  5  pounds  of  cotton,  or 
1^  bushels  of  corn  would  pay  a  dollar  on  the  debt.  When  it  matured,  if  he 
wanted  to  pay  a  dollar  he  had  to  sell  1}  busheh  of  wheat,  2}  bushels  of  corn,  or 
12  pounds  of  cotton.  Such  was  the  effect  of  the  demonetization  of  silver ;  the 
suspension  of  its  free  and  unlimited  coinage.  The  volume  of  currency  ceased 
thereby  to  be  governed  by  the  natural  output  of  the  mines,  and  greedy  man  wag 
given  the  power  of  regulating  or  fluctuating  it  for  his  own  purposes.  What  an 
immense  power  this  is.    How  prone  is  human  nature  to  use  and  abuse  power  ! 

Mr.  Anderson,  of  Kansas,  made'tlie  ,"point  that  the  increased  use 
of  silver  would  tend  to  diminish  the  value  of  the'gold  unit. 

Mr.  Walker,  of  the  Committee  on  Coinage,  Weights  and  Measures, 
made  a  speech  against  the  bill,  from  which  the  following  extracts 
are  taken  : 

Now,  I  want  to  say,  Mr.  Speaker,  that  more  money  means  more  misery.  [Laugh- 
ter and  applause.] 

Mr.  ROGERS.    I  will  take  a  little  of  the  misery. 

Mr.  BUNNELL.    That  kind  of  misery  we  all  like. 

Mr.  PERKINS.  We  would  all  be  willing,  I  think,  to  stand  a  little  of  it. 
[Laughter.] 

Mr.  PICKLER.    Let  us  suffer.     [Laughter  and  applause.] 

Mr.  WALKER,  of  Massachusetts.  I  want  to  say  to  you  that  money  in  a  proper 
form  and  of  standard  value  can  only  be  used  to  a  limited  amount.  It  is  true  of 
this  as  of  everything  else,  that  "a  eufliciency  is  enough ;"  and  when  you  go  beyond 
that  amount  you  can  not  profitably  use  the  surplus  money  any  more  than  you  can 
use  anything  that  is  more  than  a  sufliciency.  The  money,  therefore,  that  is 
BoflBcient  to  perform  the  business  or  exchanges  of  the  country  is  all  that  is  necea- 


80 

sary  or  that  can  be  used.  You  might  illustrate  this  by  taking  the  case  of  a  rail- 
road. You  can  not  use  a  railroad  profitably  beyond  the  necessities  of  the  traffic 
on  the  road.  When  you  farnish  the  facilities  for  transporting  all  that  is  brought 
to  the  road  for  transportation,  all  that  you  furnish  beyond  that  is  surplus,  and  is 
useless  and  is  owned  at  a  loss;  hence,  as  far  as  money  is  concerned,  you  can  not 
use  a  dollar  beyond  what  is  necessary  to  make  the  exchanges  of  commerce. 

Mr.  Walker  has  singular  ideas  on  economics,   and  particularly 

about  money. 

In  the  firtt  place,  money  has  no  place  whatever  in  economics.  We  never  talk 
-about  money  in  economics ;  it  is  the  exchange  of  the  products  of  labor,  and  money 
is  an  incident.  You  might  destroy  all  the  gold  and  silver  in  this  country  to-night, 
and  waking  up  to  morrow  morning  you  would  not  be  hurt  one  iota;  our  business 
would  go  on  juat  the  same.  For  fifteen  years  we  did  not  have  gold  or  silver  in 
this  country  as  money.  Now,  do  not  misunderstand  me  in  this  statement.  I  say 
^' if  gold  and  silver  were  destroyed  past  all  redemption  the  world  over  "  it  would 
make  no  difiierence;  I  do  not  mean  if  gold  and  silver  were  demonetized  and  green- 
backs put  in  their  place  for  that  is  just  as  difit-rent  a  thing  as  black  is  from  white. 
I  am  talking  about  the  destruction  of  money  out  of  the  world.  There  is  not  a  man 
here  who  does  not  know  that  if  all  the  coin  were  actually  destroyed  we  would 
never  know  the  difference;  we  would  go  right  along  as  now. 

Are  we  to  understand  from  Mr.  Walker  that  if  half  the  world's 
money  were  destroyed  it  would  not  affect  prices  or  business  ?  Such 
arguments  answer  themselves. 

The  following  extract  is  from  a  speech  by  Mr.  Lind  : 

All  agree  that  the  immediate  cause  of  our  depressed  condition  is  the  prevailing 
low  prices  ot  all  comcnofHt'es,  and  especially  agricultural  productions.  This  lower- 
ing of  prices  commenced  in  1873-74  and  has  continued  with  but  few  interruptions 
to  date.  It  has  affected  all  classes  injuriously  (except  tbe  money  lenders) ;  but 
the  farmers  the  most  severely  of  all  The  reason  of  this  is  plr.in.  The  farmer's 
profits  (wagef)  depend  on  the  value  of  the  8urplu«(  of  his  crops  after  paying  for 
machinery,  store  bills,  and  other  expenses.  While  it  is  true  that  a  bus^iel  of 
"wheat  will  go  as  far  as  it  ever  did  in  exchange  for  commodities,  it  is  also  plain  that 
the  surplus,  the  profit,  or  wage-fund,  is  more  than  one  third  less  than  it  was  in 
1873  for  the  purpose  of  paying  taxes,  interest,  mortgage  indebtedness,  or  purchase- 
money  on  land. 

.  To  illustrate,  we  will  assume  that  the  wheat  crop  of  the  average  Minnesota  farm 
was  1,000  bushel  in  1873,  and  the  same  in  1889.  The  amount  of  wheat  required  to 
pay  for  machinery,  to  p^y  store  bills,  and  other  expenses,  and  for  seed  was  the 
same  as  la&t  year — say  700  bushels.  According  to  the  table  of  prices  which  I  will 
submit  further  on,  the  surplus  of  300  bushels  was  worth  in  New  York  in  1873, 

$393,  and  in  1889  only  |267. 

*  ***** 

In  1873  a  bushel  of  wheat  would  buy  33.41  grain  of  gold ;  in  1889,  only  20.89 
grains. 

******* 

The  only  feature  of  the  bill  which  does  not  meet  my  full  approval  is  the  proviso 
to  the  second  section  which  permits  the  withdrawal  of  bullion.  This  power 
might,  with  the  connivance  of  the  Secretary,  be  used  for  improper  purposes.  I  shall 
ask  to  have  the  bill  amended  in  this  respect,  but  if  I  fail  I  know  it  will  be  don© 
in  the  Senate. 

It  could  hardly  be  expected  that  politics  would  be  kept  out  of  the 

debate  on  so  important  a  question,  and,  as  the  following  extract 

shows,  it  was  not : 

Mr.  KERR,  of  Iowa.  Mr.  Speaker,  the  gentleman  who  has  just  taken  his  seat 
[Mr.  Bland]  has  made  some  complaint  about  "gag  law"  as  applied  to  that  side  of 
the  House.  The  gentleman  ought  to  have  become  used  to  gag  law,  because  during 
the  last  four  years  the  men  who  have  had  control  of  the  House  on  that  side  of  the 


81 

Ohamber  have  so  managed  affairs  that  the  gentleman  has  been  completely 
silenced  daring  all  that  time,  and  his  demand  for  silver  has  been  suppressed.  He 
ought  to  have  become  used  to  gag  law,  after  that  discouraging  experience.  The 
last  administration  not  only  did  not  permit  any  proposition  to  come  from  the  com- 
mittee of  that  side  of  the  Hou^>e  looking  toward  the  free  coinage  of  silver 

Mr.  BLAND.  Will  the  gentleman  allow  me  to  correct  him?  He  does  not  wish 
to  mak"  a  misstatement. 

Mr.  KERR  of  Iowa.    No,  I  do  not  wish  to  make  a  misstatement. 

Mr.  BLAND.  In  the  Forty  ninth  Congress,  during  Cleveland's  administration, 
I  introduced  a  free  coinage  bill,  tl-.esame  one  I  have  now,  word  for  word  and  line 
for  line.  I  advocated  it  on  this  floor,  and  it  received  96  Democratic  votes  and  only 
30  Republican  votes.  If  you  want  to  go  into  polities  about  it,  that  is  the  fact.  I 
urgwd  it  during  that  administration,  and  I  will  eay  that  I  am  no  Democrat  or  Re- 
publican on  this  subject.  I  am  in  favor  of  silver  as  against  party  or  pereon,  or 
anything  else.    [Applause.] 

Mr.  Wickharu,  in  an  able  speech,  in  which  he  laid  down  funda- 
mental principles  which  no  one  undertook  to  answer,  and  which  no 
one  could  overthrow,  said: 

A  competent  treatment  of  the  legal  constitution  of  money  must  proceed  by  a 
careful  scrutiny  of  just  what  it  is  that  cocsfitu'es  the  equity  and  efficiency  of 
money  in  its  main  uses  and  purposes.  In  order  lo  that  inquiry  let  U3  first  define 
those  uses.  Money  has  been  devised  to  serve  as  an  instrument  for  appraising  or 
measuring  out,  as  by  common  measure,  all  goods  for  the  purpose  of  transfer  and 
distribution — for  buying  and  selling,  and  also  to  be  a  form  or  mode  into  which 
<^i,pital,  resources,  or  purchasing  power  can  be  converted  for  convenient  trau sport, 
for  safe  keeping  or  loan  upon  interest.  Now,  ia  each  and  all  of  these  uses  or 
modes  of  employment,  there  is  by  universal  consent  one  chief  and  paramount 
excellence,  one  single  supre'oe  criterion  of  merit,  su^h  overoiastering  importance 
a3to  sink  every  other  feature  quite  out  of  mentionable  worth. 

I  m?.ke  bold  to  defy  denial  of  the  truth  of  my  proposition,  or  belittleroent  of  its 
central  importance  in  this  whole  discussion,  when  I  aflarm  that  a  dollar  which 
stands  approximately  steadfast  and  constant  to  the  customary  and  familiar  pur- 
chasing power  or  value  as  expressed  in  the  great  staples  for  food  and  fabric,  and 
which  will  give  the  strongest  assurance.^  of  continuing  stability  in  the  future,  is, 
from  the  standp  int  of  legislation  the  best  dollar,  and  that  legal  constitution  of 
standard  money  which  will  best  secure  such  constancy  is  the  desideratum  of  states- 
manship. I  denounce  as  unqualifiedly  false  and  fraudulent  the  proposition  not 
indeed,  explicitly  affirmed  and  overtly  supported  by  anybody  who  knows  how  to  be 
ashamed,  hut  still  constantly  insinuated  and  injected  into  the  popular  utterances, 
on  the  subject,  that  the  mos^va'uable  dollar  is  the  best  dollar,  and  that  it  is  wise 
legislation  to  foster  increase  in  the  value  of  money.  I  deny  that  it  is  either  wise 
or  jast.  On  the  contrary,  I  affirm  that  it  is  grossly  unjust  in  relation  to  outstand- 
ing contracts  and  disastrous  to  the  future  of  production,  for  legislation  to  commit 
all  oblii^ations  and  all  the  products  of  toil  to  the  tender  mercies  of  an  appreciated 
and  appreciating  dollar. 

No!  In  the  view  of  the  lawmaker,  that  is  not  the  best  dollar  which  has  the 
greatest  commercial  value,  nor  necessarily  the  one  which  has  the  least ;  but  rather 
that  one  which  shows  the  greatest  constancy  as  a  valuator  of  goods.  This  would 
seem  to  be  a  self-evident  proposition,  and  one  pointing  the  way  to  a  solution  of 
the  main  question.  Which  one  of  the  two  money  mf  tals,  then,  is  it  that  has  de- 
parted from  the  fair  dollar  value?  In  ticking  on  a  market  relation  of  22  to  1,  in- 
stead of  16  to  1,  which  metal  has  b^en  misbehaving  in  respect  to  constancy? 

Let  us  not  be  deceived  by  words  and  appearances — by  a  conventional  nomen- 
clature born  of  the  vicious  legislation  of  the  pa-t.  A  statute  compdling  the  mint 
to  give  out  a  coin  dollar  for  every  equivalent  weight  of  bullion  brought  to  it  will, 
of  course,  fix  and  maintain  1  he  price  of  that  metal  up  to  exactly  the  minting  rate, 
and  will  give  to  it  what  to  the  shallow  view  seems  a  magic  property  of  stabilir.y  of 
value;  but  "hat  fixity  is  merely  a  fix'ty  in  the  price  of  a  meial  in  terms  of  itself. 
Under  free  coinage  of  silver  that  metal  could  never  fall  in  price  below  the  Ifgil 
par  wifh  its  own  coin.  This  is  not  du3  to  any  property  in  the  metal.  It  would 
take  place  in  precisely  the  same  manner  with  any  metal  to  which  mi^ht  be  given 
unlimited  minting  privileges. 


82 

Mr.  Bartine,  of  Nevada,  made  a  finished  and  scholarly  speech^ 
from  which  the  following  brief  extract  is  taken  : 

This  bill  brings  before  you  for  consideration  the  "great  battle  of  the  standards,"' 
the  80-cailed  silver  question,  which  has  agitated  the  public  mind  for  some  fifteen 
or  twenty  years,  both  in  Europe  and  America.  The  action  of  this  Congress  may 
finally  determine  the  question,  so  fraught  with  significance,  whether  eiiver  shall 
be  completely  restored  to  its  former  position  as  money,  or  the  people  of  this^ 
country  be  for  all  time  limited  to  what  has  been  called  the  golden  "yard-stick  "" 
as  a  measure  of  a'^aIuo.  The  Committee  on  Coinage'is  composed  of  gentlemen 
entertaining  very  diffeirtnt  views  on  this  subject.  Some  of  them  believe  that  gohi 
is  the  only  safe  measure  of  value,  and  that  silver  is  a  dangerous  element  in  our 
monetary  system.  Others  believe  that  gold  standing  by  itself  is  a  most  unjust,, 
uncertain,  and  fluctuating  standard,  and  that  the  complete  remonetizalion  of  silver 
is  an  imperative  necessity.  Some  would  suspend  the  use  of  silver  entirely,  except 
in  a  subsidiary  way  ;  others  would  have  free  coinage  tomorrow,  and  still  others, 
would  pursue  an  intermediate  course  and  approach  free  coinage  by  degrees.  But 
I  believe  that  all  recognize  the  fact  that  for  several  years  past  the  sentiment  of 
this  country  has  been  growing  and  strengthening  in  favor  of  silver ;  and  that  at 
the  present  time  there  is  a  very  general  demand  for  a  largely  increased  use  of  that 
metal,  In  complying  with  such  a  demand,  it  is  obvious  that  each  member  would 
be  influenced  largely  by  his  personal  views,  and  make  the  concession  in  the  line 
which  he  deemed  wisest  and  best.  One  who  has  no  confidence  in  silver  would 
naturally  favor  its  use  in  such  a  way  as  to  do  the  least  possible  harm.  One  who  has> 
every  confidence  in  silver  would  seek  to  utilize  it  in  such  manner  as  to  do  the 
greatest  possible  good. 

My  own  opinions  are  of  the  most  pronounced  and  radical  character.  Such  study 
as  I  have  been  able  to  bestow  upon  the  subject  has  convinced  me  that  the  double 
standard,  comprising  both  gold  and  silver,  is  in  every  way  superior  to  a  standard 
consistingof  either  one  alone.  I  believe  that  the  United  Sl:ates  can  establish  bi- 
metallism, and  by  simply  decreeing  freeicoinage  maintain  the  two  metals  at  a  fixed 
ratio  as  long  as  such  law  is  upheld.  More  than  this,  I  believe  it  to  be  the  duty  of 
this  Government  to  do  so;  and  I  but  voice  the  sentiment  of  our  whole  Western 
country  when  I  express  the  opinion  that  the  legislation  of  1873  which  struck  silver 
from  the  pedestal  which  it  then  occupied,  which  said  to  every  debtor  in  this  broad 
land,  •' Henceforth  you  shall  pay  your  debts  in  gold  alone,"  was  the  gravest  and 
most  unconscionable  wrong  ever  perpetrated  upon  a  free  people  by  a  Government 
of  their  own  choice.  The  bill  under  consideration  is  a  step  in  the  direction  of  cor- 
recting that  wrong,  and  as  such  I  extend  to  it  a  welcome.  But  I  find  myself  unable 
to  give  to  it  an  unqualified  indorsement,  and  further  on,  if  time  will  permit,  I  shall 
take  occasion  to  point  out  some  of  its  objecdonable  features. 

Mr.  Lanham,  in  a  speech  on  the  question,  said: 

Until  the  passage  of  the  resolution  providing  for  the  consideration  of  the  bill 
now  before  the  House,  it  was  little  dreamed  by  the  people  that  a  full,  fair,  and 
free  opportunity  would  be  denied  their  Representatives  to  vote  upon  the  distinct 
and  independent  proposition  for  the  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  silver,  in  a  reg- 
ular and  appropriate  way,  nor  was  it  expected  that  any  Representative  could  es- 
cape the  responsibility  of  committing  himself  to  the  record,  as  either  in  favor  of 
or  in  oppneiiion  to  that  measure. 

But,  strange  to  say,  under  the  peculiar  parliamentary  administration  which  now 
op3rates  and  arbitrarily  dictates  the  procedure  of  the  House,  it  appears  that  only 
such  a  measure  and  such  amendments  as  it  may  suit  the  pleasure  of  the  majority 
to  allow  shall  be  presented  or  considered,  and  this,  too,  despite  the  fact  that  the 
minority  of  the  Committee  on  Coinage,  Weights  and  Measures  have  regularly 
submitted  their  views  and  proposed  a  substitute  for  the  pending  bill,  and  the  fur- 
ther fact,  as  stated  by  the  gentleman  from  Missouri  [Mr.  Bland],  that  it  was  agreed 
by  that  committee  that  a  vote  should  be  had  in  the  House  on  such  substitute. 
******* 

Mr.  Speaker,  there  has  never  yet  been  made  any  satisfactory  answer  to  the  com- 
plaint of  the  people  srrowing  out  of  the  demonetization  of  the  silver  dollar  by  the  act 
of  12ch  February,  1873.  Before  the  bar  of  public  opinion  this  piece  of  real  legis- 
lation has  been  repeatedly  arraigned.  Popular  indictment  has  described  it  aa  a 
fraud  and  a  crime.    The  method  and  circumstance  of  its  enactment  have  been. 


83 

criticised  and  denounced  with  all  the  vehemence  of  an  outraged  and  indignant 
people,  emarting  under  the  keenest  sense  of  injustice  and  betrayal  of  confidence. 

No  one  has  been  found  who  has  been  able  to  successfully  explain  or  defend  it. 
Upon  the  statute  book  it  stood  for  a  half  decade  as  a  taint  and  reproach  upon  Fed- 
eral legislation.  It  has  never  been  fully  eradicated,  nor  will  it  be  until  the  law  as 
it  was  aforetime  shall  be  restored  to  its  ancient  position  and  revived  ip  its  prittine 
vigor.  Somethinft  is  due  a  people  who  believe  their  trust  has  been  abused — some 
reparation  for  a  wrong,  whether  wickedly  perpetrated  or  inadvertently  committed, 
ought,  in  all  good  conscience,  to  be  made. 

No  senf-ible  man  will  deny  the  abiding  popular  grievance  and  dissatisfaction  en- 
gendered by  the  fa'it  that  a  constitutional  and  standard  coin,  sanctioned  by  reason  of 
i(8  strength  for  fourscore  years,  was  tbus suddenly  and  indeliberately,  if  not  covertly 
and  fraudently,  dropped  from  its  rightful  pla-^e  and  office  in  our  monetary  system. 
It  is  doubtful  if  any  Congressional  action  on  financial  question,  since  the  formation  of 
our  Government  has  provoked  sreater  discontent  or  occasioned  more  profound  dis- 
trust of  legislative  integrity.  It  has  never  been  acquiesced  in  by  the  people.  It  never 
will  be.  No  accessary  post  factum  support  of  the  injury  done  orreeult  int^^nded,  by 
whomsoever  tendered  and  contributed,  will  ever  receive  popular  ratification. 

The  following  paragraph  from  the  speech  of  Mr. Taylor,  of  Illiaois, 

shows  with  what  persistence  palpable  errors  are  promulgated. 

Mr.  Taylor  said  : 

I  know  of  no  reason  why  the  silver  producer  should  have  preference  over  the 
farmer  who  grows  wheat.  I  know  of  no  reason  why  the  Gavernment  should  pur- 
chase the  product  of  the  silver  mine  at  100  cents  when  it  is  worth  only  75  cents. 

Such  utterances,  however,  do  little  more  than  show  careless 
thinking.  Does  Mr.  Taylor  really  believe  there  will  or  can  be  a  dif- 
ference between  coined  and  uncoined  silver  under  free  coinage? 

Mr.  Conger,  in  his  speech,  June  7th,  also  said : 

Free  coinage  at  once  means  still  more.  It  means  a  profit  of  26  cents  on  eveiy 
dollar's  worth  of  bullion  taken  to  our  mint.  It  means  that  the  bullion  owners  of 
this  country  can  take  their  $50,000,000  worth  of  bullion  to  the  mint  and  walk  away 
with  $63,000,000,  pocketing  at  once  a  clear  profit  of  $13,000,000,  and  the  tax-payera 
mustpavit;  while  under  the  present  practice,  or  under  the  proposed  law,  the 
Government  makes  whatever  seigniorage  there  is.  And  last  year  this  amounted 
to  over  $9,000,000,  and  since  1878  it  ha?  in  the  aggregate  amounted  to  $53,0[  0,000, 
which  has  been  covered  into  the  Treasury  and  been  used  to  pay  the  current  ex- 
penses of  the  Government. 

Undoubtedly  any  one  holding  silver  bullion  at  the  time  of  the 
passage  of  free  coinage  would  make  a  profit  on  it  if  bullion  was  below 
1.29.  But  does  Mr.  Conger  mean  to  say  that  under  free  coinage  pro- 
ducers of  silver  would  continue  to  make  26  cents  profit,  or  that  there 
would  be  any  difference,  after  the  mints  were  open  to  free  coinage, 
between  coined  and  uncoined  silver?  Such  talk  does  not  indicate 
good  thinking.  When  everybody  can  have  silver  coined  into  money 
as  freely  as  he  now  can  have  gold  coined,  how  can  there  be  a difierence 
between  the  market  price  and  the  mint  price  of  silver? 

The  question  is  not  whether  he  who  mines  silver  has  a  right  to 
have  it  coined  into  money.  The  real  question  is  as  to  the  right  of 
everybody  to  have  recourse  to  both  metals  for  money  in  the  discharge 
of  all  obligations  and  to  carry  on  business. 

Mr.  Cannon  also  made  the  same  unguarded  assertion.     He  said: 

In  other  words,  if  free  coinage  were  written  upon  the  s'atute-books  any  man 


84 

could  so  <o  one  of  our  mints  with  a  dollar's  worth  of  the  worlds  BiWer  bull!  in,  and 
on  depositing  it  there,  could  get  back  for  that  bullion  a  silver  dollar  and  have  27 
cents  lefc. 

One  would  hardly  have  expected  such  a  statement  from  one  who 
voted  for  free  coinage  in  the  Forty-sixth  Congress.  However,  Mr. 
Cannon  seems  to  have  been  carried  away  with  bullion  redemptioa. 
He  said  in  his  speech  at  the  close  of  the  debate  : 

The  Republican  party  when  it  met  in  national  convention  in  1888  resolved  in 
favor  of  both  gold  and  silver  for  money.  I  slood  on  that  platform  tben  and  I 
stand  on  it  now.  I  have,  by  vote  in  ihe  House,  by  speech,  by  precept  and  exam- 
ple always  favored  the  use  of  the  two  metals,  not  gold  alone,  nor  silver  alone,  but 
both,  for  money,  and  I  will  not  knowingly  vote  for  any  bill  or  any  amendment 
that  I  am  sati.-fied  will  bring  us  to  the  use  of  either  to  the  exclusion  of  the  other. 
Having  said  that  much,  I  want  to  eay  novv  that  in  the  exercise  of  my  best  judg- 
ment I  shall  vote  fjr  the  substitute  offa'-ed  by  the  gentleman  from  Iowa  [iMr. 
Conger]  because  I  believe  that  at  the  present  tion,  uuder  the  present  conditions, 
it  is  the  best  legislation  that  we  can  obtain  which  will  insure  the  use  of  both 
metals  for  money.  I  may  be  mistaken.  I  have  been  mistaken.  But  my  judg- 
ment is  that  way,  and  now  for  a  few  moments  I  will  give  a  reason  for  the  faith 

that  is  in  me.  ^  .,     ,,    ,,,       .,        ,    i,- 

First  what  does  this  substitute  do?  *  *  *  It  provides  that  the  silver  bullion 
purchased  under  the  provisions  of  this  act  shall  be  subject  to  the  requirements  of 
existing  law,  and  so  on,  and  that,  upon  thedemaad  of  the  holder,  the  notes  issued 
in  payment  for  this  bullion,  at  the  discretion  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  (the 
two  minds  meeting),  shall  be  exchanged  for  bullion,  dollar  for  dollar,  at  t tie  market 
price.  Now,  there  we  come  to  a  stumbling-block  to  some  gentlemen.  They  say 
the  bdl  would  b^  verv  good  if  it  were  not  for  that  provision.  In  my  opinion,  la 
the  present  condition  of  things,  that  provision,  is  a  wise  one. 

Mr.  Dingley,of  Maine,  usually  a  close  and  careful  thinker,  seems  also 
to  have  got  somewhat  mixed  up  on  the  question  of  coinage.  He  said: 
Gold  is  coined  at  its  bullion  value.  The  25  8  grains  of  gold,  nine-tenths  fine, 
which  i^  found  in  a  gold  dollar,  is  worth  exactly  the  same  before  it  is  coined  as 
after.  The  comcidence  of  the  coinage  value  witQ  the  bullion  value  makes  free 
coinage  of  gold  not  only  just  anl  proper,  but  also  ecoaomically  sound  and  safe. 

The  inquiry  has  oft«n  been  made  ia  this  debate  by  gentlemen  who  desire  free 
coinage  ot  silver  at  the  ratio  of  16  to  1,  "  Why  not  treat  silver  as  you  do  gold?" 
The  e'videat  answer  is  that  this  would  necessitate  t'le  coining  of  silver  at  a  ratio  of 
22  to  1,  instead  of  16  to  1,  as  you  desire;  that  in  order  to  treat  silver  as  we  do  gold 
it  would  require  567  grains  of  8ilve^  nine-tenths  fine,  instead  of  412^  grains,  to  be 
placed  in  each  silver  dollar;  for  412.i  grains  of  silver  before  coinage  is  worth  only 
72  cents,  wtiile  the  purpase  ia  to  have  it  worth  100  cents  after  coinage. 

Frfte  coinage  for  silver  at  the  rate  of  16  to  1  is  impossible  so  long  as  the  bullion 
value  of  silver  is  so  much  lees  than  the  coinage  value,  unit  ss  it  is  proposed  to  have  the 
Government  take  all  the  silver  that  the  owners  of  silver  bullion  will  bring  them,aiid 
pay  them  25  per  cent,  more  for  it  than  it  will  bring  in  the  markets  of  the  world. 

Mr.  Dingley  admits  that  there  can  be  no  difference  between  coined 
and  uncoined  gold  while  coinage  is  free.  How  can  there  be  a  dif- 
ference any  more  between  coined  and  uncoined  silver,  when  coinage 
is  free,  no  matter  what  ratio  it  is  coined  at? 

Whether  silver  coined  at  the  ratio  of  16  to  1  of  gold  will  remain 
at  a  parity  with  gold  at  that  ratio,  is  another  question  and  depends 
on  other  laws.  It  will  depend  in  no  small  degree  on  the  effect  of 
free  coinage  of  silver  on  the  value  of  gold.  The  demonetization  of 
silver  had  the  effect  to  materially  increase  the  value  of  gold,  and  its 
Tcmonetization  will  undoubtedly  operate  to  decrease  its  value. 


85 

The  error  we  are  here  combatting  is  the  notion  that  there  is  or 
can  be,  under  free  coinage,  a  difference  between  coined  and  uncoined 
silver,  which  the  producer  of  silver  will  gain.  Mr.  Dingley,  on  reflec- 
tion, will  surely  not  persist  in  so  absurd  a  claim. 

Much  more  sensible  is  the  following  from  the  same  speech : 

Mr.  Spaaker,  it  is  impossible  in  the  present  status  of  silver  to  dispose  of  the 
silver  question  otherwise  than  tentatively,  and  in  many  respects  unscientifically. 
We  are  simply  waiting  in  the  hope  that  the  gulf  now  existini^  between  silver  bul- 
lion and  gold  will  in  du«  time  be  bridged.  We  hope  and  believe  that  this  bill  by 
using  more  silver  as  money  in  such  a  way  aa  to  maintain  the  parityof  our  gold  and 
silver  coins  will  aid  in  bridging  this  gulf  when  free  coinage  can  safely  come.  But 
it  can  not  safely  come  now. 

Mr.  Brewer,  too,  seems  to  have  been  subjected  to  the  same  con- 
fusion of  ideas — ■ 

To-day  the  bullion  value  of  the  silver  dollar  is  about  78  cents,  or  22  cents  less 
than  its  coined  value.  Shall  we  give  that  22  cents  to  the  interest  that  is  support- 
ing this  lobby,  that  has  tried  to  force  the  interest  of  their  employers  upon  our  at- 
tention, or  shall  we  save  that  22  cents  for  the  benefit  of  the  people?  The  bill 
under  consideration,  if  it  shall  become  a  law,  will  save  it  for  the  people,  while  the 
free  coinage  will  give  it  to  the  bullion  producer.* 

When  anybody  can  have  bar  silver  converted  into  the  form  of 
coin  free,  how  can  there  then  be  a  difference  in  the  value  of  an  ounce 
or  a  pound  of  silver  in  the  form  of  bars  and  in  the  form  of  coin  ? 

Such  talk  is  evidence  of  poor  thinking. 

The  following  statesman-like  plea  for  the  bill,  as  the  best  at- 
tainable under  all  the  circumstances,  was  made  by  Mr.  McKinley  : 

Now,  Mr.  Speaker,  what  I  rose  to  say  among  other  things,  is  that  we  can  not 
have  ideal  legislation.  It  is  not  possible.  Practical  men  do  not  expect  it.  Prac- 
tical statesmen  can  only  strive  for  it,  and  secure  the  best  which  is  attainable.  It 
is  impossible,  in  any  legislation,  that  may  come  before  this  or  any  legislative  body 
to  have  it  entirely  and  in  every  part  meet  the  views  of  every  individual  member. 
That  is  utterly  out  of  the  question.  And  so,  Mr.  Speaker,  I  shall  support  this 
measure,  although  it  does  not  in  all  of  its  provisions  meet  my  entire  approval.  I 
would  have  this  bill  different  if  I  could,  but  it  represents  the  purpose  and  the  idea 
not  fully,  it  is  true,  which  I  have  touching  the  silver  legislation  which  isrequire^', 
and  I  shall  vote  for  it,  because  it  is  in  the  right  direction,  and  embodies  much 
which  is  good,  and  all  the  interest  of  the  people.  What  does  it  do?  First,  it 
utilizes  every  dollar  of  the  silver  product  of  the  United  States,  and  to  that  extent 
it  is  just  to  the  silver  producers  of  this  country.  Second,  it  makes  a  demand 
for  that  silver  product,  and  if  the  friends  of  silver  are  right,  it  will  so  increase 
the  value  of  that  product  as  to  bring  silver  in  parity  with  gold.  It  provides 
further  that  the  very  instant  silver  and  gold  come  together,  or  the  very  instant 
that  the  bullion  value  of  silver  shall  be  equivalent  to  the  coin  value  of  silver,  that 
very  instant  you  have  free  and  unlimited  coiuage  of  silver  in  the  United  States. 

So  I  say,  Mr.  Speaker,  that  whatever  may  be  our  views  about  this  point  or  about 
that  point,  touching  this  whole  subject  of  silver,  we  get  by  this  bill  the  use  of  our 
entire  silver  prodact,  and  we  make  that  product  into  money  that  is  safe  in  the 
hands  of  the  people  and  will  be  good  for  all  time  wherever  and  by  whomsoever 
held.  Mr.  Speaker,  no  man  should  hesitate  between  the  two  millions  a  month 
tkat  we  have  now  and  thefourandabalf  millions  a  month  that  we  shall  have  under 
the  proposed  law.  We  get  an  increased  volume  of  money,  with  safety  to  the 
Government  and  the  citizen.  Pass  this  bill  and  what  do  we  have?  An  increase 
of  $30,000,000  annually  of  circulation  to  be  put  out  among  the  people  and  into  the 

*  In  the  first  edition  this  and  the  quotation  above  it  were  erronsously  attributed  to 
Mr.  McKinley,  by  which  injuttice  was  uninteniionally  dene  him. 


86 


avenues  of  businese.  Vote  aeainst  this  bill  and,  in  my  judgment,  you  vote  that 
there  shall  be  no  legislation  upon  the  silver  question  at  tbis  session  of  Congress. 
That  is  what  I  fear  it  means.  We  know  we  cannot  have  free  coinage  now,  except 
in  the  manner  as  provided  in  the  bill.  You  know  you  could  not  have  it  when 
you  were  in  the  majority  in  this  House  You  know  you  cannot  get  it  now.  You 
do  not  mean  to  get  it.  Therefore,  I  say  that  to  defeat  this  bill  means  to  defeat 
all  silver  legislation  and  to  leave  us  with  two  millions  a  month  only,  when  by 
passing  this  bill  we  would  have  four  and  a  half  millions  a  month  of  Treasury 
notes  as  good  as  gold. 

With  the  speech  of  Mr.  McKinley  debate  closed,  and  the  House 
was  brought  to  a  vote.  The  debate  on  the  whole  was  able,  and  was 
participated  in  by  many  others,,  but  space  prevents  further  quotations. 

Mr.  Bland  gave  notice  that  he  desired  to  move  to  recommit  the  bill 

with  instructions  to  report  in   its  stead  a  free  coinage  bill,  and  as 

jBoon  as  in  order  to  do  so,  offered  the  following  resolution  : 

Resolved,  That  the  bill  be  recommitted  to  the  Committee  on  Coinage,  "Weighta 
and  Measures,  with  instructions  to  report  back  a  bill  for  the  free  coinage  of  silver. 

The  yeas  and  nays  were  demanded.     This  being  the  test  vote,  it 

is  here  given  in  full  : 

YEAS— 116. 


Abbott, 

Chipman, 

Hatch, 

Morgan, 

Stockdale, 

Alderson, 

Clancy, 

Hayes, 

Morrow, 

Stone,  Ky. 

Allen,  Mich. 

Clarke,  Ala. 

Haynes, 

Gates. 

Stone,  Mo. 

Allen,  Miss. 

Cobb, 

Heard, 

O'Farrell, 

Tarenev, 

Anderson,  Kans. 

Connell, 

Henderson.N.C.O'Neall,  Ind. 

Tillman, 

Bankhead, 

Cooper,  Ind. 

Herbert, 

Outhwaite, 

Townsend,  Colo 

Barnes, 

Cothran, 

Hermann, 

Owens,  Ohio 

Tucker, 

Bartine, 

Cowles, 

Holman, 

Parrett, 

Turner,  Ga. 

Barwig, 

Crain, 

Kelley, 

Peel, 

Turner,  Kans. 

Biggs, 

Criep, 

Kilgore, 

Penington, 

Vandever, 

Blanchard, 

Culberson.Tex 

.  Lane, 

Perkinks, 

Walker,  Mo. 

Bland, 

Davidson, 

Lanham, 

Perry, 

Washington, 

Blouat, 

De  Haven, 

Lee, 

Pierce, 

Wheeler,  Ala. 

Breckinridge,  Ark 

;.  Dockery, 

Lester,  Ga. 

Reilly, 

Whitthorne, 

Breckinridge,  Ky, 

,  Edmunds, 

Lester,  Va. 

Richardson, 

Wike, 

Brick  ner, 

Ellis, 

Lewis, 

Robertson, 

Wilkinson, 

Brookshire, 

Enloe, 

Mansur, 

Rogers, 

Williams,  111. 

Buchanan,  Va. 

Featherston, 

Martin,  Ind. 

Rowland, 

Wilson,  Mo. 

Bullock, 

Forney, 

McClammy, 

Sayers, 

Wilson,  W.  Va. 

Bynum, 

Fowler, 

McClellan, 

Seney, 

Yoder. 

Candler,  Ga. 

Funston, 

McCreary, 

Siaiveley, 

Carter, 

Gibson, 

McRae, 

Skinner, 

Caruth, 

Goodnight, 

Montgomery, 

Springer, 

Catchings, 

Grimes, 

Moore,  Tex. 

NAYS— 140. 

Stewart,  Tex. 

Adams, 

Cogswell, 

Hansbrough, 

Moffitt, 

Scull, 

Arnold, 

Coleman, 

Harmer, 

Moore,  N.  H. 

Sherman, 

Atkicson,  Pa. 

Comstock, 

Haugen, 

Morey, 

Simonds, 

Atkinson,  W.  Va. 

Conger, 

Hemphill, 

Morrill, 

Smith,  W.  Va. 

Baker, 

Craig, 

Henderson,  111 

.  Morse, 

S  cnyser. 

Bank?, 

Dalzell, 

Henderson,  la, 

.  Mudd, 

Snider, 

Bayne, 

Dargan, 

Hill, 

Mutchler, 

Stephenson, 

Beck  with. 

Dingley, 

Hitt, 

Nnte, 

Stivers, 

Belden, 

DoUiver, 

Hopkins, 

O'Donnel), 

Stockbridge, 

Belknap, 

Dorsey, 

Houk, 

O'Neil,  Mass. 

Struble, 

Bergen, 

Bunnell, 

Kennedy, 

O'Neill,  Pa. 

Sweney, 

Bingham, 

Dunphy, 

Kerr,  la. 

Payne, 

Taylor,  111. 

87 


Soothman, 

Boutel'e, 

Bowden, 

Brewer, 

Brosius, 

Brower, 

Browne,  Va. 

Buchanan,  N.  J. 

UurrowB, 

Burton, 

Butter  worth, 

Caldwell, 

Cannon, 

Caswell, 

Cheacile, 

Clark,  Wis. 


Elliott, 

Evani", 

Ewart, 

Farquhar, 

Finley, 

Flick, 

Flood, 

Flower, 

Frank, 

Gear, 


Kt  tc'ham, 

Kinsey, 

Lacey, 

La  Foliette, 

Laid  law, 

Laws, 

Lind, 

Lodge, 

Maish, 

Mason, 


Pay sou, 
Tickler, 
Pugsley, 


Taylor,  Tenn. 
Taylor,  E.  B. 
Thomas, 


Quackenbush,   Traoey, 


Geisscnyiainer,  McComas, 
Gest,  MeCord, 

Gifford,  McCoimick, 

Greenhalge,       McDaffie. 
Grosvenor,         McKinley, 
Hall,  Miles, 


Quinrt, 

liainrs, 

Ray, 

Reed,  la. 

Revburn, 

Rile, 

Rockwell, 

Rowell, 

Russell, 

San  ford. 

Sawyer, 

Scrauton, 


Van  Schaick, 
Venable, 
Wade, 

Walker,  Mass. 
Wallace,  N.  Y. 
Wickham, 
Wiley, 

Williams,  Ohio, 
Wilson,  Ky. 
Wilson,  Wash. 
Wright, 
Yardley. 


Classified  politically  this  vote  stands  : 

Yeas,  IKJ — Republicans.  15;  Democrats,  101. 
Nays,  140 — Democrats,  13;  Republicans,  127. 

The  bill  was  then  passed,  yeas  135,  nays  119. 

Divided  politically  this  vote  stands,  yeas  135,  all  Republican;  nays, 

119,  Democrats  112,  Republicans  7. 

The  Republicans  voting  (or  Bland's  motion  to  recommit,  were. 

Messrs.  Bartine,  of  Nevada ;  Carter,  of  Montana ;  Hermann,  of  Oregon ;  Town- 
send,  of  Colorado ;  DeHaven,  Morrow  and  Vandever,  of  California ;  Connell,  of 
Nebraska ;  Anderson,  Fauston,  Kelley,  Perkins,  and  Turner,  of  Kansas  ;  Feather- 
ston,  of  Arkansas,  and  Allen,  of  Michigan. 

The  thirteen  Democrats  voting  against  Mr.  Bland's  motion  to  re- 
commit, with  instructions  to  report  back  a  bill  providing  for  free 
coinage,  are — 

Dargan,  of  South  Carolina;  Turner,  of  New  York;  Maish,  of  Pennsylvania; 
liainn.ofNew  York;  Wiiey,of  New  York;  Geissenhainer,  of  New  Jersey;  Mutchler,of 
Pennsylvania ;  Tracey,  of  New  York  ;  Elliott,  of  South  Carolina ;  Hemphill,  of  South 
Carolina;  O'Neill,  of  Massachusetts ;  Vena  ule.  of  Virginia;  Dunphy,  of  New  York. 

The  seven  Republicans  who  voted  against  the  bill  with  the  bullion 

Tedemption  feature  in  it  were  : 

Bartine,  of  Nevada  ;  Anderson,  of  Kansas  ;  Kelley,  of  Kansas ;  Carter  of  Mon- 
tana ;  To  wnsend,  of  Colorado;  Turner,  of  Kansas ;  Rockwell,  of  Massachusetts. 

The  following  is  the  caucus  bill  as  it  passed  the  House.  The  two 
features  of  the  bill  which  attracted  most  attention  were  bullion  re- 
demption and  free  coinage  when  silver  reached  parity  with  gold: 

THE  BELL  AS  IT  PASSED  THE  HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES. 

(H.  R.  5381.    June,  1890.) 

aN  act  directing  the  purchase  of  silver  bullion  and  the  issue  of  Treasury  notes 
thereon,  and  for  other  purposes. 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives  of  the  United  States  of  America 
in  Congress  assembled,  That  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  is  hereby  directed  to 
purcbase  from  time  to  time  silver  bullion  to  the  aggregate  amount  of  four  million 
ive  hundred  thousand  dollars'  worth  in  each  month,  at  the  market  price  thereof, 
jot  exceeding  one  dollar  for  three  hundred  and  seventy-one  and  twenty-five  one 
hundredths  grains  of  pure  silver,  and  to  issue  iu  payment  for  such  purchases  of 


88 

silver  bullion  Treasury  notes  of  the  United  States  to  be  prepared  by  the  Secretary 
of  the  Treasury,  in  such  form  and  of  such  denominations,  not  less  than  one  dollar 
nor  more  than  one  thousand  dollars,  as  he  may  prescribe,  an^l  a  sum  sufficient  tc- 
carry  into  effect  the  provisions  of  this  act  is  hereby  appropriated  out  of  any  money 
in  the  Treasury  not  otherwise  appropriated. 

Sec.  2.  That  the  Treasury  notes  issued  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  this 
Si^t  shall  be  redeemable  on  demand,  in  coin,  at  the  Treasury  of  the  United  States, 
or  at  the  offi<"e  of  any  assistant  treasurer  of  ihe  United  Strates,  and  when  so  re- 
deemed may  be  re-issued ;  but  no  greater  or  less  amount  of  such  notes  shall  be 
outstanding  at  any  time  than  the  cost  of  the  silver  bullion  then  held  in  the  Treas- 
ury purchased  by  such  notes ;  and  suoh  Treasury  notes  shall  be  a  legal  tender  in 
payment  of  all  debts,  public  and  private,  and  shall  be  receivable  for  customs,  taxes, 
and  all  public  dues, and  when  so  received  may  be  re  issued;  and  such  notes  when 
held  by  any  national  banking  association  may  be  counted  as  a  part  of  its  lawful 
reserve :  Provided,  That  upon  demand  of  the  holder  of  any  of  the  Treasury  notes 
herein  provided  for  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  may,  at  his  discretion  and  under 
such  regulations  as  he  shall  prescribe,  exchange  for  such  notes  an  amount  of  silver 
bullion  which  shall  be  equal  in  value  at  the  market  price  thereof  on  the  day  of 
exchange  to  the  amount  of  such  notes  presented. 

Sec.  3.  That  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  shall  coin  such  portion  of  the  silver 
bullion  purchased  under  the  provisions  of  this  act  as  may  be  necessary  to  provide 
for  the  redemption  of  the  Treasury  notes  herein  provided  for,  and  any  gain  or 
seigniorage  arising  from  such  coinage  shall  be  accounted  for  and  paid  into  the- 
Treasury. 

Sec.  4.  That  the  silver  bullion  purchased  under  the  provisions  of  this  act  shall 
be  subject  to  the  requirements  of  existing  law  and  the  regulations  of  the  mint  ser- 
vice governing  the  methods  of  determining  the  amount  of  pure  silver  contained, 
and  the  amount  of  charges  or  deductions  if  any,  to  be  made. 

Sec.  5.  That  so  much  of  the  act  of  February  twenty- eight,  eighteen  hundred  and 
seventy-eight,  entitled  "  An  act  to  authorize  the  coinage  of  the  standard  silver 
dollars  and  to  restore  its  legal-tender  character,"  as  requires  the  monthly  purchase 
and  coinage  of  the  same  into  silver  dollars  of  not  less  than  two  million  dollars., 
nor  more  than  four  million  dollars'  woith  of  silver  bullion,  is  hereby  repealed. 

Sec.  6.  That  whenever  the  market  price  of  silver,  as  determined  in  pursuance  of 
section  one  of  this  act,  is  one  dollar  for  three  hundrt  d  and  seventj'-one  and  twenty- 
five  hundredths  grains  of  pure  silver,  it  shall  be  lawful  for  the  owner  of  any  silver 
bullion  to  deposit  the  same  at  any  coinage  mint  of  the  United  States,  to  be  formed 
into  standard  silver  dollars  for  his  benefit,  as  provided  in  the  act  of  Jemnary 
eighteenth,  eighteen  hundred  and  thirty-seven.  And  purchases  of  silver  bullion 
shall  be  suspended  while  it  is  being  so  deposited  for  coinage. 

S£c.  7.  That  upon  the  pasf  age  of  this  act  the  balances  standing  with  the  Treas- 
urer of  the  United  States  to  the  respective  credits  of  nati  )nal  banks  for  deposits 
made  to  redeem  the  circulaiing  notes  of  such  banks,  and  all  deposits  there- 
after received  for  like  purposes,  shall  be  covered  into  the  Treasury  as  a  mis- 
cellaneous receipt,  and  the  Treasurer  of  the  United  Statfs  shall  redeem  from  the 
general  cash  in  the  Treasury  the  circulating  notes  of  said  banks  which  may  come 
into  his  possession  subject  to  redemption ;  and  upon  the  certificate  of  the 
Comptroller  of  the  Currency  that  fuch  notes  have  been  received  by  him  and 
that  they  have  been  destroyed  and  that  no  new  notes  will  be  issued  in  their 
place,  re-imbursement  of  their  amount  shall  be  made  to  the  Treasurer,  under  such 
regulations  as  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  maj'  prescribe,  from  an  appropriation 
hereby  created,  to  be  known  as  "  National  bank  notes:  Redemption  account,"  but 
the  provisions  of  this  act  shall  not  applj'^  to  the  deposits  received  under  section 
three  of  the  ?ct  of  June  twentieth,  eighteen  hundred  and  seventy-four,  requirint^ 
every  national  bank  to  keep  in  lawful  money  with  the  Treasurer  of  the  United 
States  a  sum  equal  to  five  per  centum  of  its  circulation,  to  be  held  and  used  for  the 
redemption  of  its  circulating  notes ;  and  the  balance  remaining  of  the  deposits  so 
covered  shall,  at  the  close  of  each  month,  be  reported  on  the  monthly  public  del'; 
ttatemert  as  debt  of  the  United  States  bearing  no  interest. 

Sec.  8.  That  this  act  shall  take  effect  thirty  days  from  and  after  its  passage. 
Passed  the  House  of  Representatives  June  7,  1890. 
Atie»t: 

EDWARD  McPHP:RSON,  By  C.  S.  MARTIN, 

Cto'^^  Chief  tier >. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

The  House  Caucus  Bill  in  the  Senate. 

The  bill  as  it  passed  tlie  House  contained  two  important  features — 
the  bullion  redemption  clause  and  the  section  providing  for  free  coin- 
age when  silver  reached  parity  with  gold  on  our  ratio,  or  $1.29  an 
ounce.  The  bill  went  to  the  Senate  June  9th,  and  on  motion  of  Mr. 
Teller  was  ordered  to  be  printed  and  lie  on  the  table.  On  the  fol- 
lowing day  it  was,  on  motion  of  Mr.  Morrill,  referred  to  the  Com- 
mittee on  Finance.  It  was  reported  back  to  the  Senate  by  Mr.  Mor- 
rill June  11th  with  sundry  amendments,  and  with  notice  that 
he  would  at  the  proper  time  offer  it  as  a  substitute  for  the  bill  then 
pending  in  the  Senate.  It  was  ably  discussed  on  both  sides  till 
June  17th,  when  it  was  put  upon  its  passage. 

Meantime  remonstrances,  directed  principally  against  the  bullion- 
redemption  feature  of  the  bill,  were  sent  in  from  all  parts  of  the 
country,  especially  from  the  West.  The  question  was  also  fully  dis- 
cussed by  the  press. 

The  following  from  the  Washington  Post  of  June  7  shows  some- 
thing of  the  interest  taken  in  this  measure : 

THE  BIMETALLISTS  FIRM. 

They  are  not  to  he  Deceived  by  Evasive  Legislation. 

VIEWS  OF  FKANCIS  G.  NEWLANDS. 


THB  HOUSE  OP  REPRESENTATIVES  SIMPLY  JUGGLING  WITH  THE  SILVER  QUESTION — 
BULLION  REDEMPTION  ONE  OF  THE  OBJECTIONABLE  FEATURES  OP  THE  HOUSE  MEAS- 
URE— IF  CONGRESS  FAILS  TO  PASS  A  SATISFACTORY  SILVER  BILL  THB  NATIONAL  SIL- 
VER  COMMITTEE   WILL  CALL   A  NAt!oNAL  SILVER  CON\'ENTION. 

[From  the  Washington  Post,  June  7, 1890.] 
The  action  of  the  House  Republicans  at  their  conference  and  de^ate  in  the 
House  has  added  fresh  interest  to  the  silver  question,  and  there  is  considerable 
curiopity  on  the  part  of  the  public  to  learn  how  the  compromise  measure  is  re- 
garded by  the  bimetallists.  When  a  Pod  reporter  called  on  Mr,  Francis  G.  New- 
lands,  the  member  of  the  National  Silver  Committee  from  Nevada,  he  was  found 
in  the  midst  of  a  ditmantling  process  at  his  home,  as  he  is  preparing  to  return  to 
Nevada  to  spend  the  summer  months. 

"Have  the  silver  men  given  up  the  fight?"  repeated  Mr.  Newlands,  in  reply  to 
the  reporter's  question.  "  Not  at  all.  We  are  very  much  in  earnest  in  this  matter^ 
and  do  not  intend  to  run  at  the  first  fire  of  the  gold  men." 

"  Then  you  do  not  regard  the  measure  proposed  in  the  caucus  of  the  House  Re- 
publicans as  a  substantial  recognition  of  the  requests  of  the  silver  men  ?' 
"  They  are 

SIMPLY   JUGGLING 

with  the  silver  question  in  the  House,"  said  Mr.  Newlands,  "  and  as  a  result  a  bil^ 
apparently  providngfor  the  increased  use  of  silver,  but  really  demonetizing  it^ 
has  been  placed  before  the  House,  and  it  is  to  be  rushed  through  after  a  debate  of 
a  day  and  a  half,  and  without  the  privilege  of  offering  amendments." 
"But  will  the  bimetallists  not  make  an  effort  to  amend  this  bill ?" 
"I  am  unable  to  say  what  will  be  the  action  of  the  silver  men  in  the  House. 
The  only  opportunity  to  teet  their  strength  will  be  on  a  motion  to  recommit.  If  a 
motion  to  recommit  is  made  80  as  to  provide  for  free  coinage  and  is  lost,  then 


90 

there  can  be  no  test  on  the  bullion-redemption  feature.    In  that  event  I  think  all 

the  Hilver  men  in  the  House  hIiouKI  vote  aji^aitist  the  hill.     It  reduces  silver  to  a 

commodity  and  deprives  it  of  its  cliief  element  of  value  as  a  money  metal." 

"Then  you  do  not  regard  the  bill  as  bein^  as  much  of  a  compromise  as  has  been 

claimed  for  it  ?  " 

"  The  bill  is  a 

^Qj^Qj^j^^^j^j^jp  GOLD  mbarubb; 

nothing  more  or  nothinK  lesp.  It  containH  in  it  the  germ  of  destruction  of  the 
bimetallic  principle.  Silver  bullion  is  to  be  uned  simply  as  a  socurity  for  the  cer- 
tificates ipsued  ujton  it.  The  $4,500,000  worth  punihased  the  first  month  can  be 
redeemed  the  next  on  the  surrender  of  the  certificates  representiuf^  it.  The  Pame 
bullion  can  be  sold  during  the  same  month  and  ajjain  redeemed  the  next  month. 
Should  the  increased  purchase  of  bullion  go  on  until  $100,000,000  is  accumulated 
the  entire  amount  could  be  withdrawn  at  any  time.  The  currency  would  thus  be 
cr)ntracted  in  this  amount  and  a  large  amount  of  bullion  thrown  on  the  market. 
Thus  the  power  to 

CONTRACT   THE   CURRENCY 

is  given  to  a  single  man.  I  predict  that  if  this  bill  passes  the  Treasury  will  be  but 
a  conduit  through  whi,;h  Knglaud  will  eventually  draw  her  silver  for  use  in  Icdia. 
Dut  the  gt»Id  monometallisla  who  arc  pushing  this  measure  say  this  power  will 
never  be  cxercined.  Do  you  doubt  that  if  (^leveland,  Manning,  and  Jordan  were 
iri  power  it  would  be  exercised?  Whv  is  this  power  asked  for  and  insisttd  uptm 
if  not  to  bo  oxerc!H«'d  ?  Can  any  one  doubt  that  it  will  be  exercised  at  some  time 
under  some  Secietary  or  by  some  system  of  jugglery  ?  The  bimetallists  insist  that 
whatever  gf^ld  or  silver  tioes  into  the  TreaNury  shouhl  come  out  only  as  money, 
either  in  the  shape  of  actual  coin  or  certificates  calling  for  coin.  No  better  cur- 
rency can  be  dcvisod  than  that  wlii(;h  is  backed  dollar  for  <lollar  by  gold  ami 
silver  coin  in  the  Treasury.  If  there  is  enough  gold  and  silver  money  in  the  world 
how  is  It  that  so  large  a  voluuie  of  papijr  money — either  fiat  or  credit-   exists?" 

"  Do  you  think  the  silver  men  in  the  Houae  will  stand  together  regardless  of 
party  lines?  " 

"1  don't  know.  ,,,„^  ,.^^^^.  ^^,„„. 

is  being  applied  to  the  Republicans,  althimgh  the  caucus  was  declared  to  be  not 
binding  on  the  participants.  It  was  a  meeting  for  conference  only.  The  business 
of  the  IlouBo,  by  reason  of  the  jiower  of  the  Committee  on  Kules,  is  under  the 
cnntrni  nf  three  men — Keed,  (-annon,  and  McKinley.  McKinley  is  a  bimetallist 
and  thinks  free  (coinage  vav  be  safely  entered  upon,  but  will  not  make  a  fight  for 
his  views,  lieed  and  ("annon  are  pronounced  for  bullion  redemption  or,  what  is 
the  same  thing,  the  gold  standard.  They  are  strong  men — leaders  of  the  party; 
and  wield  more  po^er  than  all  the  rest  of  the  House.  I  am  tohi  that  in  the  con- 
fereni  e,  when  McKinley  ma<le  his  motion  to  strike  out  the  hullion-rederaption 
clause,  Heed  op|)o.sed  it  in  a  vigorous  speech,  in  which  he  declared  we  must  adhere 
to  tlio  cold  standard,  otherwise  w'e  would  approach  the  level  of  China  and  India." 

"Then  you  do  not  *;oncede  the  argument  has  force ?" 

"No;  there  wa«  as  much  difference  between  the 

UNITKO   STATES    ANT)   CHINA 

V)efore  silver  was  demonetized  as  there  i-i  now.  Does  any  one  suppose  that  the  con- 
dition of  India  or  China  would  be  changed  if  they  were  to  adopt  a  gold  standard  ? 
Mr.  Meed  might  as  well  advise  us  to  refrain  from  eating  rice  lest  we  become  Ciiina- 
inen.  I  hope  the  bimetallistn  of  the  I  lotise  will  act  upon  their  convictions  regard- 
less of  party  and  not  delegate  their  right  to  think  and  vote  to  leaders  however 
able.  If  they  have  an  oppor.'unity  let  them  vote  for  free  coinage.  If  this  is  not 
obtainable  let  them  vote,  if  the  opportunity  is  otlVred,  to  strike  out  the  bullion- 
re<Ie!nption  feature.  If  tliese  fail,  let  them  kill  the  bill,  and  let,  the  gold  men  in 
the  Uepnblican  party  who  are  maftiuerading  as  the  fri»nd8  of  silver,  be  held 
responsible  by  the  country  for  their  violation  of  tha^  plank  in  the 

UKI'UHMCAN    NATIONAI,    TLA'IKORM, 

vrhich  condemns  Cleveland  tor  his  effort  to  demonetize  silver  and  declares  for  the 
uee  of  both  gold  and  silver  as  money." 

*■  K  *  ii  ^-  *  * 

It  is  strange  what  infiuence  the  opinions  of  the  bankers  have  on  the  average 
man  in  reference  to  this  monetary  (luestion.  As  a  rule  the  banker  knows  nothing 
of  monetary  science.    A  good  banker  should  have  knowledge  of  human  nature, 


»1 


knowledfto  of  valnep,  <h«i  caution  to  roo  Dint  evi»ry  lonn  is  amply  Hoourpd,  and  tlip 
'.lonptTvaiiHiii  to  reHint  tho  ttirii|>t:ilionH  to  rink.  Mcwt  of  IliiMii  do  not  knownflnuich 
)f  iiionetary  acioncti — tlio  it<lati<ui  of  tlio  volnino  of  money  to  {M>pniiition,  tlio  **f- 
fect  of  the  t'hantro  of  Htimdanl,  and  llio  n*HiiitH  of  (•ontraction  and  oxpanHion — hh 
tho  Hvera^o  public  mai\-  Talk  wilii  on«i  of  tluwn  on  tliiH  hul)joc.t  and  \\n  will  look 
wiee,  wa^  hiu  head  ominoiiHly,  acid  nay  notliin).':  Iluit  is  wordiv  of  tin*  naino  of  ar- 
f!Vinteut.  I'orlhe  hint  twclvo  ytMiiHtiu'  l)unk('iHluiv»0)ccn  pro<\j«;tin)'  di!<aHl»ir  from 
l.^ie  coinage  of  Bilver,  Imt  it  han  not  tak»Mi  place.    Tlieiy  (trowdtd 

Mlt.    CMCVItl.ANM    WITH     FICAIW, 

and  arc  doiihtlcHH  indncncMoi;;  many  able  and  wt^ll-intcntioncd  men  who  think 
they  ouj^ht  to  know  HomcthinjJton  the  hubjorl.  Why,  wti  mi|Li;ht  hh  well  b(»  f^uidisl 
by  railroad  preai<lcnt^  aw  <o  the  contri)!  <»f  railroitdH,  and  (.t'im  arui  watt^r  dirt^ctorH 
as  to  the  rc)j;nhvti(>n  of  the  price  of  water,  iiH  by  hankerH  in  relation  to  monetary 
legislation.  It  \»  a  part  of  lIuMr  hiiHiiieHS  to  make  money  Hcan'e  and  d«iar,  ho  aH  to 
increaae  It^  pIl^!lmHin^r  power.  If  the  volume  of  money  m  only  Hudiciently  con  ■ 
iracicd  the  bank«irH  will  Iih  abhi  (o  own  the  worhl." 

Mr.  NewlandH  wan  very  nmch  in  carncMt  in  dim  iMHinu;  tho  money  (piontion,  and 
jn  referrin^j  (o  that,  claas  uf  men  who,  in  onler  to  Hccure  pitrona^.'je  or  Hccure  favor 
with  the  leatlcKM  of  tlicir  parly  nnrremler  thciri-onvictioiiH  and  imperil  t  be  inlertwl. 
(»f  their  conHtitui'iitn,  nm'd  lan|j;naj.;e  more  viyoroiiH  than  diplomati<'.  lie  aluo  took 
occaBioD  to  refer  in  uncomplimentary  tertnH  to  tlume  mend)erH  who  dod(.;((d  the 
"vote  in  the  Ilouse  on  Tlinr-idav  when  the  etlort  was  made  to  re<'otnmit  the  hill. 
However,  Mr.  Newlands  in  very  Han^'iiine  tlial  ihe  hilvc^r  men  will  yet  Huccnied. 

The  (ollowiiifij  is  also  IVoiu  the  ('ditorijil  coiiiiiK'iils  ol"  IIk!  Washing- 
ton Post  of  Juno  t  : 

The  National  I'/xecntive  Silver  (-ommittee  \h  now  in  HeHHion  in  VVaHhinfyton, 
walchin;;  th(>  pro^'renn  of  Hilvcr  leKJulalion,  which,  within  the  hiHt  few  dayH,  HeeniH 
fo  have  taken  a  Hort  of  W.dl  Street  twist. 

Apprehennivo  that  a  HatinlacMory  meawiire  may  bo  dofeat<vl  either  by  combina- 
lionHor  throu;j;h  tlu;  inlliien(re  ot  tlie  mouoinetalliHlH,  the  coinmilteci  Iuih  det(*r- 
iiain('<l  in  that  «!vent  to  <;all  a  national  silver  c^onveidion,  in  wbicih  the  !''armerH' 
Alliance  and  till  other  induHtri-il  origan i/.ationH  and  bimel.allif-ts  fijenerally  will  be 
invited  to  parti<;ipat<\  uiib  ri  view  to-Hinkin^  politi<;H  for  the  time  bninKaml  mak- 
ing tho  Hilvc^r  (pH'Htiori  JlnMuintiolliii)^  inMUe  in  fnt.nre  ciimpiiitiUM,  particularly  in 
vhe  next(!oni;»((HHi<ui}d  electioMH,  ami  advimn^c  that  nobody  be  hupported  forCon- 
i^rCBH  or  tlio  I'reflidency  who  ia  not  in  favor  of  the  lull  rentoration  of  hilver  to  the 
Dliure  it  oc«;upied  an  a  moiujy  metal  prior  to  tlui  act  of  IS7i{. 

Votes  in  tiii';  Sionati-;. 

Tho  liist  vole  ill  I  ho  S(!tiato  was  on  I. ho  ainoniiinont.  propoHiMl  hy 
tho  i''inanoo  (JoniiniMot!  Htrikino-  out,  iho  provi.sion  in  tho  IIohho  hill 
inakino-  tlic  not(;s  I'lill  h^^al  tondoi', 

Mr.  tStowai't  caUod  for  l,ho  yoas  atxl   iiayH. 

The  volo  on  atrikin;^  out  the  Kj^al  toiKhir  [irovision  wuh  a.s  follows: 

YKAH-14. 

Aldrich,  Carlinle,  OJibHon, 

Blair,  ('Imndbir,  dray, 

Blodgett,  I'Vye,  Halo. 

NAYS- 50. 

Allen,  <'oke,  Hi).i;i!:inH, 

.VUison,  (!o!(piilt,  MiMco(;k, 

iJarbonr,  (^iilloni,  lnj,'.vllH, 

Bate,  l»aniel,  .Ion«'Hof  Ark. 

Jierry,  Dolpb,  .lonoH  of  Nov. 

Bailor,  ICiiHtiH,  Kentia, 

Oall,  lOvartH,  Milcliell, 

'Jamoron,  (Joorge,  Moody, 

Oaeey,  (iorman,  Mort;>in, 

Oockrell,  HearHt,  I'addock, 

So  the  atnondnuint  was  riyoctod. 


llarriH, 

Morrill, 

1 1  oar. 

I'latt. 

Mcl*herson, 

I'aHco, 

Spooner, 

I'ayne, 

Stewart, 

I'ierce, 

SUKrkbridge, 

riuinb, 

Teller, 

I'ower, 

Tiirpie, 

KatiHom, 

VoHl, 

Iten^jan, 

Voorhi  en, 

SanderH, 

Walthall, 

Sawyer, 

Wai-bl)iirn, 

Sherman, 

Wolfiott. 

D2 


Vote  on  Bullion  Redemption. 

The  VICE-PRESIDE N^T.    The  next  amendment  will  be  stated. 

The  next  amendment  of  the  Committee  on  Finance  was  in  section  2,  line  13, 
after  the  word  "reaerve,"  to  strike  out  the  following  proviso : 

"  Provided,  That  upon  demand  of  the  holder  of  any  of  the  Trf  asury  notes  herelti 
provided  for  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  may,  at  hia  dicretion  and  under  such 
regulations  as  he  shall  prescribe,  exchange  for  such  notes  an  amount  of  silrer 
bullion  which  shall  be  equal  in  value  at  the  market  price  thereof  on  the  day  of 
exchange  to  the  amount  of  snch  notes  presented." 

The  result  was  announced — yeas  57,  nays  7  ;  as  follows  : 

YEAS— 57. 


Aldrich, 

Casey, 

Harris, 

Pasco, 

Stockbridge. 

Allen, 

Cockrell, 

Hawley, 

Payne, 

Teller, 

Allison, 

Coke, 

Hearst, 

Pierce, 

Turpie, 

Barbour, 

Colquitt, 

Ingalls, 

Piatt, 

Vance, 

Bate, 

Cullom, 

.Tones  of  Ark. 

Plumb, 

Vest, 

Berry, 

Daniel, 

Jones  of  Nev. 

Power, 

Voorhees, 

Blair, 

Eustis, 

Kenna, 

Ransom, 

Walthall, 

Blodgett, 

Evarte, 

McPherson, 

Reagan, 

Washburn, 

Butler, 

George, 

Mitchell, 

Sanders, 

Wolcott. 

Call, 

Gibson, 

Moody, 

Sawyer, 

Cameron, 

Gorman, 

Morgan, 

Spooner, 

Carlisle, 

Gray, 

Paddock, 

NAYS— 7. 

Stewart, 

Chandler, 

Hale, 

Hoar, 

Morrill, 

Sherman. 

Frye,  Hiscock, 

Vote  on  Stkiking  Out  the  Conditional  Free  Coinage  Provision. 

The  VICE  PRESIDENT.    The  next  amendment  will  be  stated. 

The  next  amendment  of  the  Committee  on  Finance  was  to  strike  out  section  i 
as  follows: 

"  Sec.  6.  That  whenever  the  market  price  of  silver,  as  determined  in  pursuance 
of  section  1  of  this  act,  is  $1  for  371.25  grains  of  pure  silver,  it  shall  be  lawful  for 
the  owner  of  any  silver  bullion  to  deposit  the  same  at  any  coinage  mint  of  the 
United  States,  to  be  formed  into  standard  silver  dollars  for  his  benefit,  as  provided 
in  the  act  of  January  LS,  1837.  And  purchases  of  silver  bullion  shall  be  suspended 
while  it  is  being  so  deposited  for  coinage." 

Mr.  GORMAN.    I  ask  for  the  yeas  and  nays  on  that  question. 


The  result 

was  announced — yeas  16, 

nays  46  ;  as 

follows : 

YEAS— IG. 

Aldrich, 

Evarte, 

Hoar, 

Sawyer, 

Stockbridge, 

Allison, 

Frye, 

Morrill, 

Sherman, 

Washburn. 

Chandler, 

Hale, 

Piatt, 

Spooner, 

Dawes, 

Hiscock, 

NAYS  46. 

Allen, 

Cockrell, 

Gray, 

Morgan, 

Teller, 

Bate, 

Coke, 

Harris, 

Paddock, 

Turpie, 

Berry, 

Colquitt, 

Hearst, 

Payne, 

Vest, 

Blair, 

Cullom, 

Ingalls, 

Pierce, 

Voorhees,. 

Blodgett, 

Daniel, 

Jones  of  Ark. 

Plumb, 

Walthall, 

Butler, 

Dolph, 

Jones  of  Nev. 

Power, 

Wolcott. 

Call, 

Eustis, 

Kenna, 

Ransom, 

Cameron, 

George, 

Mander-son, 

Reagan, 

Carlisle, 

Gibson, 

Mitchell, 

Sanders, 

Casey, , 

Gorman, 

Moody, 

Stewart, 

So  the  amendment  was  rejected. 

Vote  on  the  Ten- Year  Limit. 

The  VICE-PRESIDENT.    The  next  amendment  will  be  stated. 

The  next  amendment  of  the  Committee  on  Finance  was,  in  section  7,  line 


93 


Chandler, 


after  the  word  "  passage,"  to  insert  "  and  terminate  at  the  expiration  of  ten  years 
therefrom  ;  "  eo  as  to  make  the  sectioa  read : 

"Sex;.  [8]  7.  Ttiat  this  act  shall  take  effect  thirty  days  from  and  after  its  paasage, 
and  terminate  at  the  expiration  often  years  therefrom." 

Mr.  HARRIS.    I  ask  for  the  yeas  and  nays. 

The  yeas  anH  nays  were  ordared. 

Mr.  EVARTS.  5lr.  Presideat,  I  rise  to  ask  from  the  committee  upon  what 
ground  or  baneficial  or  substaatial  idea  this  amendment  is  proposed.  It  is  not 
castomary  for  us  to  limit  our  laws  unless  under  soma  very  special  reasoas  for  so 
lirnitm?  them,  and  unless  I  hear  some  gojd  reason  to  the  contrary  I  shall  vote 
against  this  amendment. 

The  Secretary  proceeded  to  call  the  roll. 

The  roll-call  was  concluded  ;  and  the  result  announced — yeas  4, 
nays  64;  as  follows: 

YEAS-4. 
Edmunds,  M 

NAYS— 64. 
Harris, 
Hawley, 
Hearst, 
Higgine, 
Hiscock, 
Hoar, 
Ingalls, 
Jones  of  Ark. 
Jones  of  Nev. 
Kenna, 
Manderson, 
McPh-'rsoa, 
Mitchell, 

Only  four  votes  in  favor  of  the  limitation  to  ten  years. 

Mr.  PLUMB.  I  move  to  strike  out  the  first  section  and  insert  what  I  send  to 
the  desk. 

The  Chief  Clehk.  It  is  propoied  to  strike  out  section  1  of  the  bill  and  insert 
in  lien  thereof: 

"That  from  and  after  the  passage  of  this  act  the  unit  of  value  in  the  United 
States  shall  be  the  dollar,  and  the  same  may  be  coined  of  412^  grains  of  standard 
silvor,  or  25.8  grains  of  standard  gold;  and  the  said  coius  shall  be  eqaally  legal 
tender  for  all  sums  whatever.  That  hereafter  any  owner  of  silver  or  gold  bullion 
may  deposit  the  same  at  *ny  mint  of  the  United  States  to  be  foraaed  into  8;andard 
dollars  or  bars  for  his  benefit  and  without  charge;  but  it  shall  be  lawful  to  refuse 
any  deposit  of  less  value  than  $100,  or  any  bullion  so  base  as  to  be  uasuitable  for 
the  operations  of  the  Mint," 

Mr.  BLAIR.  I  ofTdr  an  amendment  to  the  proposed  amendment  of  the  Senator 
from  Kansas,  which  is,  to  add  at  the  end  of  the  second  section : 

"Nor  shall  the  amount  of  silver  coined  and  issued  from  the  mints  of  the  United 
States  be  more  than  $5,000,000  for  each  calendar  month." 

The  VICE-PRESIDhCNr.  Ta«  question  is  on  agreeing  to  the  amendment  pro- 
posed by  the  Senator  from  New  Hampshire  [Mr.  Blair]  to  the  amendment  of  the 
S-nator  from  Kansas  [Mr.  Plumb]. 

Mr.  HARRIS.  I  ask  for  the  yeas  and  nay 3  on  the  amendment  to  the  amend- 
ment. 

The  yeas  and  nays  were  ordered,  and  the  Secretary  proceeded  to  call  the  roll. 

The  result  was  announced — yeas  12,  nays  46  ;  as  follows  : 


Allen, 
Blair, 
Casey, 


Allen, 

Colquitt, 

Aliieon, 

CuUom, 

Bate. 

Daniel, 

Berry, 

Dawes, 

Biair, 

Dolph, 

Blodgett, 

Eustis, 

B  a  tier. 

Evarts, 

Call, 

Frye, 

Oameron, 

George, 

Carlisle, 

Gibson, 

C'^sey, 

Gorman, 

Cockrell, 

Gray, 

■Coke, 

Hale, 

rill. 

Sherman. 

Moody. 

Sawyer, 

Morgan, 

Spooner, 

Paddock, 

Stewart, 

Pasco, 

Stockbridge, 

Payne, 

Teller, 

Pierce, 

Turpie, 

Piatt, 

Vance, 

Piumb, 

Vest, 

Power, 

Voorhees, 

Pa?h, 

Walthall, 

Ransom, 

Washburn, 

Reagan, 

Wolcott. 

Sanders, 

YEAS— 12. 

Chandler, 

Dawes, 

Edmunds, 

Frye, 
Hale, 

McPherson, 
Paddock, 

Spooner, 
Washburn, 

94 


NAYS- 

-46. 

Colquitt, 

Ingalls, 

Plumb, 

Turpi©,. 

CuUom, 

Jones  of  Ark. 

Power, 

Vance, 

Daniel, 

Jones  of  Nev. 

Pugb, 

Vest, 

Eaalie, 

Kenna, 

Ransom, 

Voorbees. 

Gforge, 

Mitchell, 

Reagan, 

WaltbalK 

Gibson, 

Moody, 

Sanders, 

Wolcott. 

Gorman, 

Morgan, 

Sawyer, 

Harrip, 

Morrill, 

Siewart, 

Hearst, 

Payne, 

Stock  bridge, 

Hiscock, 

Pierce, 

Teller, 

Aldrich, 

Allison, 

Bafe, 

Berry, 

Blodgett, 

Call, 

Cameron, 

Carlisle, 

Cockrell, 

Coke, 

The  VICE-PRESIDENT.  Thp  quesHon  recurs  on  the  amendment  oflFered  by 
the  Senator  from  Kansas  [Mr.  Plumb]. 

Mr.  VEST.  In  order  to  perfect  the  amendment  in  my  judgment,  I  move  to  strike 
out  in  line  7  the  word  "  equally,"  and  to  strike  out  "sums  whatever"  and  insert 
"  debts,  public  and  private,  except  where  otherwise  stipulated."  I  do  not  like  the 
expression  "all  sums  whatever."  We  ought  to  specify  the  nature  of  the  obliga- 
tion.   I  6up])0F!e  that  is  the  meaning. 

Mr.  GEORGE.    Will  the  Senator  allow  me  to  ask  him  a  question? 

Mr.  VEST.    Certainly. 

Mr.  GEORGE.  I  wish  to  ask  the  Senator  thia  question,  by  his  consent :  Doe* 
he  propose  by  this  amendment  to  allow  contracts  to  be  made  payable  in  gold  or 
payable  in  silver,  and  if  when  po  made  payable  in  gold  that  they  can  not  be  raid 
by  a  tender  of  silver,  or  if  when  made  payable  in  silver  they  can  not  be  paid  by  a 
tender  of  gold  ?  Is  that  the  view  which  the  Senator  intends  to  incorporate  in. 
the  legislation  of  the  United  States? 

Mr.  VEST,  If  the  Senator  objects  to  the  words  "  except  where  otherwise  stipu- 
lated,"    I  will  leave  them  rut  and  let  it  read  "  debtf,  public  and  private." 

Mr.  KENNA.^  Will  the  Senator  from  Missouri  state  his  amendment  again? 

Mr.  VEST.  The  word  "equally,"  in  line  7,  is  utterly  unnecessary,  besides  it 
mars  the  structure  of  the  sentence  ;  but  that  does  not  amount  to  so  much.  It  will 
mean  the  same  thing  to  say  "the  said  coins  shall  be  legal  tender."  Then  I  pro- 
pose to  strike  out  sums  whatever  "  and  to  insert  "  debts,  public  aud  private,  except 
where  otherwise  stipulated ;"  but  I  will  strike  out  the  words  "except  where  other- 
wise stipulated,"  and  say  "  all  debts,  public  and  private."  I  do  not  like  the  expree- 
■gton  "sums  whatever." 

Mr.  GEORGE.  If  the  Senator  strikes  out "  except  where  otherwise  stipulated,"^ 
I  am  satisfied. 

Mr.  VEST.    I  will  modify  it  by  saying  ''all  debts,  piblic  and  private." 

The  PRESIDING  OFFICER.  The  Senator  from  Missouri  proposes  an  amend- 
ment to  the  ameniment,  which  will  be  stated. 

The  Cbief  Clerk.  In  line  7  of  the  proposed  amendment  strike  out  "  equally," 
and  in  line  8  strike  out  the  words  "sums  whatever  "  and  insert  in  lieu  thereof  the 
words  "  debts,  public  and  private ; "  so  as  to  make  the  clause  read  : 

"And  the  said  coin  shall  be  legal  tender  for  all  debts,  public  and  private." 

The  amendment,  to  the  amendment  was  agreed  to 

The  PRESIDING  OFFICER.  Tne  question  now  is  on- agreeing  to  the  amend- 
ment of  the  Senator  from  Kansa«  [Mr.  Plumb]  as  amended. 

Mr.  BLAIR.    I  move  to  add  at  the  end  of  the  proposed  amendment : 

''  And  after  the  Ist  day  of  January  A.  D.  1890,  there  shall  be  no  legal  tender  in 
the  United  States  except  gold  and  silver  coin." 

The  PRESIDING  OFFICER.  The  question  is  on  agreeing  to  the  amendment  to 
the  amendment. 

The  amendment  to  the  amendment  was  rejected. 

Vote  on  Free  Coinage, 

The  PRESIDING  OFFICER.  The  question  recurs  on  the  amendment  offered 
by  the  Senator  from  Kansas  [Mr.  Plumb],  upon  which  the  yeas  and  nays  have; 
been  ordered. 

Mr.  MORRILL.     Lot  it  be  read. 

The  PRESIDING  OFFICER.    The  amendment  as  amended  will  be  read. 


95 


Bate, 

Coke, 

Berrv, 

Colquitt, 

Blair, 

Daniel, 

Blodgett, 

Eustis, 

Butler, 

George, 

Call, 

Gibson, 

Cameron, 

Gorman, 

Carlisle, 

Harris, 

Cockrell, 

Hearst, 

Aldrich, 

CuUom, 

Allen, 

Dawes, 

Allison, 

Edmunds, 

Casey, 

Evarts, 

Chandler, 

Frje, 

Payne, 

Teller, 

Plumb, 

Turpie, 

Power, 

Vance, 

Pugb, 

Vest, 

Ransom, 

Voorhees, 

Reagan, 

Walthall, 

Sanders, 

Wolcott. 

Squire, 

Stewart, 

McPherson, 

Spooner, 

Morrill, 

Stockbridge, 

Pierce, 

Washburn, 

Sawyer, 

Wilson  of  Md 

The  Chief  Clerk,  It  is  proposed  to  strike  out  section  1  of  the  bill  and  in  lien 
thereof  to  insert: 

"  That  from  and  after  the  date  of  the  passage  of  this  act  the  unit  of  value  in  the 
United  States  shall  be  the  dollar,  and  the  same  may  be  coined  of  4122  grains  of 
standard  silver,  or  of  25.8  grains  of  standard  gold,  and  the  said  coins  shall  be  legal 
tender  for  all  debts,  public  and  private. 

"  That  hereafter  any  owner  of  silver  or  gold  bullion  may  deposit  the  same  in  any 
mint  of  the  United  States  to  be  formed  into  standard  dollars  or  bars  for  his  benefit 
and  without  charge,  but  it  shall  he  lawful  ro  refute  any  deposit  of  less  value  than 
$100,  or  anv  bullion  po  base  as  to  be  unsuitable  for  the  operations  of  the  mint." 

The  PRESIDING  OFFICER.  The  Secretary  will  call  the  roll  on  agreeing  to  the 
amendment  of  the  Senator  from  Kansas  [Mr.  Plumb]  as  amended. 

The  result  was  announced — yeas  43,  nays  24,  as  follows: 

YEAS— 43. 
Ingalls, 
Jones  of  Ark. 
Jones  of  Nev. 
Kenna, 
Manderson, 
Mitchell, 
Moody, 
Morgan, 
Paddock, 

NAYS— 24. 
Gray, 
Hale, 
Hawley, 
Hiscock, 
Hoar,  Sherman, 

So  the  amendment  was  agreed  to. 

Upon  the  announcement  of  the  result  there  were  manifestations  of 
applause  in  the  galleries. 

The  PRESIDING  OFFICER  (Mr.  Harl-is  in  the  chair).  The  Chair  admonishes 
the  galleries  that  neither  demonstrations  of  approval  nor  disapproval  are  in  order. 

Mr.  PLUMB.    I  move  to  add  a  new  section  as  section  2,  as  follows : 

" Sec.  2.  That  the  provisions  of  section  3  of  'an  act  to  authorize  the  coinage  of 
the  standard  silver  dollar  and  to  restore  its  legal-tender  character,'  which  became 
a  law  February  28,  1878,  are  hereby  made  applicable  to  the  coinage  in  this  act 
provided  for." 

Mr.  PLUMB.    Section  3  of  the  act  of  the  28th  of  February,  1878,  provides  : 

"  That  any  holder  of  the  coin  authorized  by  this  act  may  deposit  the  same  with 
the  Treasurer  or  any  assistant  treasurer  of  the  United  States,  in  sums  not  lees  than 
$10,  and  receive  therefor  certificates  of  not  less  than  $10  each,  corresponding  with 
the  denominations  of  the  United  States  notes.'  The  coin  deposited  for  or  repre- 
senting the  certificates  shall  be  retained  in  the  Ireaeury  for  the  payment  of  the 
Bame  on  demand.  Said  certificates  shall  be  receivable  for  customs,  taxes,  and  all 
public  dues,  and,  when  so  received,  may  be  reissued." 

Mr.  GEORGE.  I  shoLld  like  to  ask  the  Senator  from  Kansas  whether  under 
his  amendment,  if  the  bill  is  amended  as  he  proposes,  silver  certificates  of  less 
than  $10  can  be  issued. 

Mr.  PLUMB.  There  is  a  provision  of  a  subsequent  act,  in  an  appropriation 
act  about  1887  or  1888,  under  which  certificates  of  one  and  two  dollars  denomina- 
tion can  be  iseu<^d  ad.  libitum. 

Mr.  GEORGE.  Would  that  provision  be  applicable  to  coinage  under  this  pro- 
posed act  ? 

Mr.  PLUMB.    Undoubtedlv. 

The  PRESIDING  OFFICER.  The  question  is  on  agreeing  to  the  amendment 
of  the  Senator  from  Kansas  [Mr.  Plumb]. 

The  amendment  was  agreed  to. 


96 

Mr.  REAGAN,  I  move  to  add  to  the  bill,  to  come  In  as  section  3,  what  I  send 
to  the  desk. 

The  PRESIDING  OFFICER.  The  amendment  proposed  by  the  Senator  from 
Texas  will  be  read. 

The  Chief  Clerk.    It  is  proposed  to  add  a  new  section,  as  follows : 

"  Sec.  3.  That  the  coin  certificates  issned  under  the  provisions  of  this  act  shall 
be  of  denominations  of  not  less  than  one  nor  more  than  one  hundred  dollars, 
and  such  certificates  ehall  be  redeemable  in  coin  of  standard  value.  And  the 
Secretary  of  the  Treasury  shall  cause  to  be  coined  from  time  to  time  so  mu^h  of 
tb  e  bullion  received  under  the  provisions  of  this  act  as  may  be  necessary  to  furnish 
coin  for  the  redempiif^n  of  such  certificates.  A  sufficient  sum  to  carry  out  the 
provisions  of  this  act  is  hereby  appropriated  out  of  any  money  in  the  Treasury 
not  otherwise  appropriated.  The  provision  in  section  1  of  the  act  of  February  28, 
1878,  entitled  '  An  act  to  authorize  the  coinage  of  the  standard  dollar  and  to  re- 
store its  legal-tender  charactf^r,'  which  requires  the  S^creta^-y  of  the  Treasury  to 
purchase  at  tht  market  price  thereof  not  less  than  $2,000,000  worth  of  silver  bul- 
lion per  month,  nor  more  than  $4,000,000  worth  per  month  of  such  bullion,  is 
hereby  repealed." 

The  PRESIDING  OFFICER.  The  question  is  on  agreeing  to  the  amendment 
priposed  hy  ihr  Senator  from  Texas  [Mr.  Reagan]. 

Mr.  PLUMB.  I  move  to  strike  out  so  much  of  the  amendment  as  relates  to  the 
coinage  of  bullion,  contained  from  lines  4  to  8  inclusi'^e. 

"  And  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  shall  cause  to  be  coined  from  time  to  time 
60  much  of  Vte  ballion  received  under  the  provisions  of  this  act  as  may  be  neces- 
sary tofurnisW  coin  for  the  redemption  of  such  certificates." 

Mr.  REAGAN.    There  is  no  objetttion  to  that.     I  accept  the  amendment. 

The  PRESIDING  OFFICER.  The  Senator  from  Texas  accepts  the  amendment 
of  the  S -nator  from  Kansas,  and  so  modifies  his  amendment.  The  question  is  oa 
agreeing  to  the  amendment  of  the  Senator  from  Texas  as  modified. 

Mr.  EDMUND"'.  I  wish,  without  interfering  at  all  with  the  fine  symposium  we 
are  having  on  a  subject  very  interesting  to  the  people  of  the  United  States,  to  say 
(avoiding  thereby,  so  far  as  I  am  concerned,  any  call  of  the  yeas  and  nays)  that  I 
am  opposed  to  the  bill  as  it  now  stands  and  every  one  of  its  amendments,  in  gen- 
eral and  in  particular,  and  therefore  that  I  am  not  to  be  called  upon  hereafter  to 
account  for  having  allowed  an  ameadment  to  pass  without  calling  for  the  yeas  and 
nays.  I  am  willing  to  deliver  over  ro  the  Democratic  party,  whatever  it  may  be 
(which  U  a  question  I  have  not  time  here  to  discuss),  the  manag^-ment  of  the  finan- 
ces of  this  country  for  the  time  being,  but  I  only  sta'^e  this  in  ord^r  that  I  may  not 
trouble  the  Senate  with  demanding  the  yeas  and  nays  upon  the  various  ornamen- 
tations tha^  are  given  to  t>iis  hoodlum  that  is  set  up. 

Mr.  PLUMB.  Mr.  President,  the  question  as  to  what  responsibility  the  Senator 
from  Vermont  shall  hold  his  people  to,  or  they  shall  hold  him  to  is  of  course  of  no 
consequence  except  as  between  tho3«  two  parties;  but  when  he  says  he  is  going  to 
deliver  over  to  the  Democratic  party  the  control  of  the  finances  of  this  country  oh 
account  of  the  vote  j  ist  given  for  free  coinnge  of  silver,  I  ask  him  what  he  is  going 
to  do  with  the  last  Republican  national  platform  ?  Is  he  going  to  consent,  or  agree, 
or  otherwise  provide  that  the  platform  of  the  Republican  party  adopted  at  Chicago 
in  1888  shall  be  the  Decnocratic  platform,  and  if  he  i-<,  is  he  g  nng  to  clnm  for  the 
Republican  party  the  platform  adopted  in  St.  Louis  in  1888  upon  which  Mr.  Cleve- 
land was  nominated? 

Names  are  sometimes  things.  I  prefer  to  believe,  Mr.  President,  that  in  this 
ebullition  the  Senator  from  Vermont  does  not  represent  either  himself  or  the  Re- 
publican party.  He  will  s  )me  day  think  better  of  thig  proposition  to  meet  the 
reasonable  and  just  demands  of  the  people  of  the  Unifed  States  in  regard  to  cur- 
rency supply  and  the  material  of  which  it  is  to  be  composed  ;  and  while  I  feel  grati- 
fied at  his  course  in  declining  to  put  any  obstruction  in  the  way  of  the  passage  of 
the  bill  now  before  the  Senate,  I  am  not  willing  that  what  he  says  shall  go  ta  the 
country  as  representing  the  Republican  party,  although,  of  course,  if  the  questio» 
were  between  him  and  me  as  to  who  was  en  it!ed  to  speak  authoritatively  as  to  the 
Republican  party,  it  would  be  decided  in  his  favor. 

Mr.  EDMUNDS-  Mr.  President,  I  stand  by  the  Republican  platform  to  which 
the  Sena'.or  from  Kansas  has  alluded,  fully  and  in  all  its  implications;  but  oar 


97 

friends  the  Democrats  on  the  other  side,  and  their  deluded  followers  and  coadju- 
tors, have  poisoned  that  Republican  platform  and  transformed  it  into  a  platform 
that  no  Democratic  convention  ever  dared  to  make,  and  that  no  Democratic  admin- 
istration, that  no  Democratic  House  of  Representatives  ever  dared  to  propose  to  do, 
because  they  knew  that  swifcly — it  may  take  some  years  to  do  so — the  people  of 
the  United  States  would  find  out  that  they  had  been  deluded  and  misled,  as  people 
before  have  been  in  all  countries,  by  getting  up  a  cry  of  people  who  have  something 
to  sell  and  people  who  have  something  to  pay,  to  expend,  and  when  the  expansion 
comes  and  the  break  comes,  as  it  certainly  will  and  always  has,  then  it  is  not  the 
poor  and  the  sorrowful  that  we  are  talking  about  or  the  debtors.who  profit  by  it,  but 
it  is  the  very  persona  that  these  gentlemen  are  now  howling  against  so  strongly  who 
make  all  the  money  out  of  it.    That  is  what  all  human  experience  has  shown. 

Therefore,  Mr.  President,  standing  by  everything  that  the  Republican  platform 
says,  I  declare  that  this  has  turned  it  into  a  poison  and  a  wrong,  and  it  is  not  what 
it  purports  to  mean  at  all ;  and  let  those  profit  by  it  who  make  their  profit  by  and 
by,  and  explain  themselves. 

Mr.  VEST.  Mr.  President,  the  Senator  from  Vermont  makes  an  assertion  which 
is  directly  contradicted  by  the  record  and  is  historically  untrue.  He  states  that 
no  Democratic  House  has  ever  passed  a  free-coinage  bill.  The  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives in  1877,  with  a  large  Democratic  majority,  did  pass  a  free-coinage  act, 
pure  and  simple,  and  it  came  to  the  Senate  and  was  mutilated  here,  with  the  free- 
coinage  feature  taken  out  of  it  by  the  Republican  party,  and  that  is  the  record. 

Mr.  EDMUNDS.  Oh,  yes,  Mr.  President,  I  had  forgotten  that  there  was  a 
Democratic  party  in  1878  and  1879  [laughter]  ;  and  I  will  not  believe  there  was — 

The  PRESIDING  OFFICER.  The  Chair  must  remind  the  Senator  from  Ver- 
mont that  under  the  rule  no  one  is  at  liberty  to  speak  oftener  than  once  nor  more 
than  five  minutes  upon  any  pending  question. 

Mr.  EDMUNDS.  ThenI  move  to  postpone  the  bill  indefinitely,  and  I  will  see 
what  I  can  do  then. 

The  PRESIDING  OFFICER.     That  motion  is  in  order. 

Mr.  BUTLER.  I  ask  that  the  Senator  from  Vermont  may  have  unanimous 
consent  to  proceed. 

Mr.  EDMUNDS.  I  do  not  ask  any  unanimous  consent.  I  am  not  yet  a  servant 
of  the  party  on  the  other  side. 

Mr.  BUTLER.    I  am  sorry  he  is  not,  Mr.  President. 

Mr.  EDMUNDS.  The  Democratic  party  as  it  is  called,  being  the  House  of 
Representatives,  or  a  majority  of  it,  in  1878  and  1879,  did  pass  a  contrivance  of 
that  kind,  just  as  they  are  trying  to  pass  it  now,  in  order  to  overthrow  by  appeals 
to  the  worst  instincts  and  the  unhappiest  solicitudes  of  the  United  States  some- 
thing that  might  bring  them  into  power.  They  accomplished  it,  and  Mr.  Cleve- 
land was  elected  ;  and  having  been  elected  by  their  votes,  Mr.  Cleveland  was  wise 
enough  and  brave  enough  to  tell  his  Democratic  supporters  that  that  sort  of  delu- 
sion could  not  be  carried  into  practice ;  and  the  Democratic  party  was  wise  enough 
for  a  wonder — wise  enough  for  a  wonder — to  be  absolutely  silent  for  four  years 
upon  that  topic.  I  was  going  to  make  a  very  improper  quotation  from  Shake- 
speare, but  I  will  not  make  it.  No  patriot — I  will  change  Shakespeare  a  little — no 
patriot  opened  his  mouth  to  bark  at  the  administration  of  President  Cleveland 
because  he  persistently  and  steadily  declined,  under  whatever  influence,  and  I 
honor  him  for  it.  In  whatever  way  I  may  differ  from  him  as  to  his  policy  and 
career,  he  was  certainly  a  patriot  in  that  respect.  He  could  not  be  betrayed  nor 
seduced  into  destroying  the  prosperity  of  the  people  of  the  United  States  by  ad- 
vising any  such  measure  as  that  which  we  have  now  or  as  is  suggested  by  our 
Democratic  associates,  and  no  man  in  either  House — there  may  have  been  an  excep- 
tion, but  I  never  heard  of  it — in  the  whole  four  years — and  think  of  it,  Mr.  Presi- 
dent, four  years  of  Democratic  silence  [laughter] — opened  his  lips  to  relieve  a 
suffering  people  from  a  want  of  the  coinage  of  the  silver  dollar,  when  everybody 
who  had  anything  to  pay  could  borrow  money,  if  he  had  anything  to  present  for 
borrowing  it,  of  his  neighbor  or  his  bank  or  anywhere  else,  for  a  less  cost  of 
interest  than  he  ever  could  before,  and  when  all  the  time  in  those  four  years  the 
Treasury  was  bulging  (if  I  may  use  a  nautical  expression)  with  the  silver  coinage 
that  was  deposited  in  its  vaults,  and  where  a  large  surplus  of  it  still  is. 

I  say,  then,  with  great  respect  to  my  friend  from  Kansas  and  to  everybody  else, 
that  this  is  the  new  performance,  renewed  from  1878  and  1879  lo  1890,  of  the 


98 

Democratic  party,  when  it  has  no  responsibility  (and  I  agree  it  ought  never  to  have 
any),  again  proposing  to  entangle  the  Republican  party,  who  must  look  a  little 
farther  than  the  cry  of  to-day,  into  a  measure  of  this  kind.  So  be  it.  I  deliver 
it  over  to  the  Democratic  party. 

Mr.  REA.GAN.  Mr.  President,  I  simply  desire  to  say  that  the  Senator  from 
Vermont  [Mr.  Edmunds]  is  a  little  mistaken  when  he  says  that  no  member  of 
either  House  opened  hia  mouth  against  the  policy  of  the  President  during  the  last 
Administration.  It  perhaps  did  not  attract  the  attention  of  the  Senator  that  one 
hundred  Representatives,  members  of  the  House,  signed  a  paper  and  addressed 
it  to  the  President,  after  the  newspapers  gave  it  out  that  he  was  opposed  to 
free  coinage  or  desired  the  repeal  of  the  law  authorizing  the  limited  coinage  of 
silver,  asking  him  to  suspend  his  judgment  upon  that  subject  until  he  could  come 
to  Washington  and  consult  with  the  representatives  of  the  people  who  elected 
him  President  President  Cleveland  was  hardly  expected  to  make  an  answer  to 
that,  but  he  did  make  a  pretty  vigorous  answer  to  it,  and  that  answer  contained 
in  substance  the  statement  that  the  coinage  of  silver  had  already  trenched  so  far 
upon  the  supply  of  gold  in  the  country  as  to  endanger  our  capacity  to  redeem 
legal-tender  notes. 

Mr.  EDMUNDS.    What  year  was  that? 

Mr.  REAGAN.  That  was  the  year  he  was  elected  President,  and  before  the  first 
Congress  met  after  he  was  elected.  A  response  was  made  to  that.  I  had  the 
honor  to  make  that  response  and  to  inquire  who  informed  the  President  that  the 
coinage  of  silver  had  driven  gold  out  of  the  country,  and  to  show  from  the  Treasury 
reports  a  steady  accumulation  of  the  surplus  of  gold  from  the  passage  of  the  act 
of  1878  to  that  time.  I  also  inquired  who  informed  the  President  that  the  legal- 
tender  notes  were  refused  to  be  redeemed  in  gold.  The  law  did  not  say  so.  I 
inquired  also  who  informed  him  that  they  were  to  be  redeemed  at  all,  for  the  law 
of  1878  required  that  when  paid  into  the  Treasury  they  should  be  reissued  and 
kept  in  circulation. 

The  Senator  from  Vermont  is  usually  thoroughly  informed,  but  evidently  this 
morning  he  is  somewhat  out  of  humor,  and  it  is  not  surprising  that  young  and 
inexperienced  men  under  defeat  should  get  out  of  humor ;  and  he  may  not  recol- 
lect as  well  as  he  would  under  other  circumstances. 

Sir,  there  were  Democrats  brave  enough  to  tell  the  President,  who  was  willing 
to  sacrifice  the  public  interest,  that  they  would  not  submit  to  it;  just  as  to-day 
there  are  Republicans  brave  enough  to  tell  the  Administration  that  they  can  not 
be  led  to  sacrifice  the  interest  of  this  country,  and  that  the  interests  of  the  people 
must  be  subserved  and  not  the  interests  of  a  class  which  seeks  to  get  dear  money 
and  cheap  labor  and  cheap  property,  to  oppress  the  masses  for  the  benefit  of  the 
few. 

Mr.  EDMUNDS.  Mr.  President,  I  did  not  happen  to  be  invited  to  sign  the 
private  and  confidential  paper  that  the  hundred  gentlemen  of  tbe  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives addressed  to  Mr.  Cleveland,  but  I  happen  to  know  this,  that  whatever 
may  have  been  the  private  appeals  and  objurgations  by  deluded  men  to  the  Presi- 
dent of  the  United  States,  at  that  time  Mr.  Cleveland,  he  evidently  denied  their 
application  and  nothing  came  of  it  except  a  rejoinder  that  my  friend  fron  Texas 
says  he  or  somebody  else  made.  After  that,  the  Democratic  party  at  St.  Louis — 
and  there  is  a  book  (I  was  able  to  extract  it  like  a  brand  from  the  burning  from 
the  hands  of  my  friend  from  Louisiana  [Mr.  Eustis]  yesterday)  containing  the 
Democratic  declaration  of  principles — it  is  rather  a  joke  to  put  it  that  way,  but 
tiiat  is  the  way  it  is  in  the  book,  printed  so — in  which  they  extol  Mr.  Cleveland's 
administraMon  of  the  public  affairs  from  beginning  to  end.  They  shied  on  the 
silver  question  because  it  was  party  tactics,  as  they  thought,  to  do  so.  They  had 
not  beliefs  enough  that  they  were  willing  to  express  to  state  them,  knowing  what 
their  candidate's  opinion  was,  and  they  would  rather  live  under  a  conservative 
administration  of  Mr.  Cleveland  and  get  the  offices,  if  he  got  in,  than  to  make  a 
frank  and  explicit  declaration  of  what  mv  friend  from  Texas  says  was  the  opinion  , 
of  ooe  hundred  members  of  the  House  of  Representatives, 

After  all  this,  when  that  solemn  and  respectable  body  met  at  St.  Louis  in  June, 
eighteen  hundred  and  whatever  it  was — 1888, 1  suppose — I  repeat  that  they  de- 
clared ia  the  most  specific  language  that  a  Democratic  committee  on  resolutions 
was  capable  of  employing  (and  I  assume  it  must  be  complete)  that  the  whole  ad- 
ministration of  Mr.  Cleveland  had  rebounded  to  the  benefit  and  honor  of  the 


99 

country.  It  included,  I  take  It,  the  wicked  measures  that  he  repressed  as  much 
as  the  good  measures  that  he  favored ;  namely,  free  trade,  or  properly  foreign 
trade,  to  the  disadvantage  of  every  laborer  in  the  United  States.  That  ia  where 
you  were. 

Now,  your  opportunity  has  come  again  when  you  have  no  responsibilitiea  and 
only  appeal  to  the  cry  of  those  who  are  desirous  to  pay  their  debts  for  less  than 
they  coui.racted  to  pay  them,  and  the  desire  of  those  who  have  mines  of  silver  to 
made  products  to  sell  to  again  make  a  perfectly  safe  declaration  that  you  are  for 
everything  and  f>>r  everybody,  but  when  you  have  Eelected  your  man  and  put  him 
in  place  I  am  bound  to  pay  the  homage  of  my  respectful  admiration  to  all  of  you 
that  you  would  know  enough  not  to  pretend  any  such  nonsense  while  he  was  in 
the  chair. 

Mr.  VEST.  Mr.  President,  the  Senator  from  Vermont  exhibits  his  usual  inge- 
nuity, ac'.;ompanied  by  his  usual  unfairness  in  shirking  the  issue  which  he  made 
himself  and  from  which  he  is  forced  to  retreat  by  the  record.  He  asserted  here 
that  no  Democratic  House  of  Representatives  had  ever  dared  to  pass  a  free-coinage 
bill.  I  assert  that  the  record  shows  that  the  House  of  Representatives,  in  the 
Forty -fourth  and  Forty- fifth  Congresses,  both  of  them  overwhelmingly  Democratic, 
did  pass  a  free- coinage  bill  and  sent  it  to  the  Senate. 

The  Senator  now  seeks  to  evade  his  misstatement  of  facts  by  an  appeal  to  the 
pax'tisau  passions  of  his  own  party.  In  one  breath  he  alludes  to  his  deluded  asso- 
ciates upon  that  side  of  the  Chamber,  and  then  turns  with  Parisian  elegance  to 
compliment  his  respected  friend  from  Kansas,  who  is  one  of  them. 

But  the  Senator  from  Vermont  makes  another  misstatement  from  the  record. 
He  says  that  no  Democrat  was  found  to  protest  openly  against  Mr.  Cleveland's 
views  in  regard  to  silver.  I  assert  that  within  ten  days  after  the  first  Congress 
met  after  Cleveland  had  announced  those  views,  one  of  the  most  distinguished 
Democratic  Senators  in  this  body,  our  late  associate,  James  B.  Beck,  of  Kentucky^ 
in  a  speech  which  attracted  the  attention  of  the  whole  country  and  electrified  the 
West,  attacked  those  opinions  and  upon  this  floor  held  the  undivided  attention  of 
bis  brother  Senators  whilst  he  gave  his  reasons  for  differing  with  the  Democratic 
President;  and  now  the  Senator  from  Vermont,  with  hia  usual  candor,  with  his 
usual  sincerity,  compliments  President  Cleveland. 

Sir,  all  I  can  say  in  that  a  great  many  hard  things  and  harsh  things  have  been 
said  of  that  distinguished  Democrat,  but  the  encomium  of  the  Senator  from  Ver- 
mont i^  the  most  terrible  assault  that  ever  was  mgde  upon  him.     [Laughter.] 

Mr.  EDMUNDS.    You  will  nominate  him  again,  all  the  same.     [Laughter.] 

Mr.  REAGAN.  Mr.  President,  I  ask  leave  to  modify  my  amendment  by  strik- 
ing out  the  words  "coin  certificates,"  and  inserting  in  place  of  them  "  the  certifi- 
cates provided  for  in  the  first  section  of  this  act." 

Mr.  PLUMB.  Mr.  President,  my  service  in  this  body  has  been  long  enough  to 
enable  me  to  recall  that  the  Senator  from  Vermont  [Mr.  Edmunds]  uttered  about 
the  same  jeremiad  in  1878  that  he  has  just  uttered  in  regard  to  the  provision 
which  has  been  adopted  by  a  decided  majority  of  the  Senate.  If  I  could  have  him 
sworn  on  his  voir  dire,  as  we  say  about  a  juryman,  I  would  be  willing  to  leave  it  to 
him  whether  a  single  one  of  the  dismal  prophecies  made  about  the  effects  to  fol- 
low the  passage  of  the  bill  remonetizing  silver  in  1878  had  been  realized. 

I  am  aware  that  in  very  large  measure  the  criticism  upon  the  Republicanism  of 
any  one  by  the  Senator  from  Vermont  carries  very  great  weight.  The  Senator 
from  Colorado  [Mr,  Teller]  says  "  in  Vermont."  No,  Mr.  President,  ia  the  United 
States,  and  I  would  prefer  always  to  resolve  doubts  by  accepting  his  standard  of 
Republicanism  rather  than  my  own ;  but  when  I  have  no  doubt  I  must  of  necessity 
^jffer  with  him  and  accept  his  reproaches.  At  the  present  moment  I  feel  com- 
fortable about  the  company  in  which  I  find  myself,  embracing  so  large  a  number 
of  Republicans  whose  faith  is  as  well  attested  by  works  as  that  of  the  Senator 
tsom  Vermont ;  and  all  the  more  because  in  1878  I  voted  to  carry  the  Bland  bill  over 
the  vetp  of  a  Republican  President,  and  the  Senator  from  Vermont  voted  to  sustain 
that  veto ;  all  the  more  because  I  see  that  what  he  then  said  was  Republicanisnj 
proveH  not  to  be  so;  all  the  more  because  the  people  whom  I  have  ttie  honor  to 
irepresent  in  part  upon  this  floor  put  the  stamp  of  their  approval  upon  my  Repub- 
licanism as  voiced  in  the  votes  which  I  gave  at  that  time  against  the  Senator  from 
Vermont  and  men  opinionated  like  him,  who  then,  as  now,  talked  with  a  sneer 
about  the  people  of  the  West  wanting  to  create  cheaper  money  with  which  to  pay 


100 

their  debts,  and  accused  them  of  repudiation.  The  RepubHcanism  of  Kansas  is  as 
conspicuous,  as  well  foundeii,  and  as  enlightened  as  that  of  Vermont. 

Mr.  President,  I  might  say  something  disagreeable  about  the  people  who  want 
the  policy  of  the  Government  so  fashioned  that  what  they  contracted  for  shall  be 
largely  increased  in  value  before  pay  day  comes.  He  has  no  word  of  denuaciatioa 
for  the  people  who  have  so  managed  the  affairs  of  the  Government,  or  have  had 
them  so  managed  by  those  who  represent  them  in  Congress,  as  to  add  30  per  cent, 
to  the  value  of  the  metal  in  which  the  debts  due  them  are  to  be  paid,  to  the  great 
burden  of  those  who  have  to  pay  them. 

But  this  is  not  a  time  for  recriminations.  I  thank  Heaven  that  there  is  room 
enough  in  the  Republican  party  for  wide  differences  of  opinion  upon  great  eco- 
nomic questions.  No  member,  however  eminent,  can  speak  with  absolute  author- 
ity, and  no  one  is  necessary  to  the  party,  nor  can  it  be  held  as  the  exponent  of 
any  locality  or  class.  Whether  he  or  I  is  on  the  ri^rht  track  now,  so  far  as  the  tenets 
of  the  Republican  party  as  to  silver  are  concerned,  I  am  willing  to  take  the  last  na- 
tional platform  as  meaning  what  the  people  I  represent  uaderstood  it  to  mean  on 
that  question.  If  the  people  of  Vermont  understood  it  differently  t^at  is  their 
lookout.  We  shall  all  be  wiser  some  of  these  days,  and  I  do  not  doubt  that  the 
Senator  from  Vermont  will  have  abundant  and  early  occasion  to  recant  what  he 
has  just  said  about  the  direful  effects  to  follow  the  free  coinage  of  silver. 

Mr.  President,  there  never  has  been  an  experience  of  human  kind  which  justifies 
what  the  Senator  from  Vermont  has  said.  There  never  was  but  one  demonetiza- 
tion of  silver  in  this  country  and  that  was  in  1873.  There  n-^  ver  has  been  any  dis- 
turbance growing  out  of  the  relations  between  the  two  metals  except  what  grew 
out  of  that  act.  There  is  not  a  line  or  a  syllable  of  human  exptirience  which  can  in- 
dicate to  any  unbiased  person  that  this  measure  which  the  Senate  has  set  its  fav- 
orable seal  upon  and  which  it  is  about  to  perfect  and  pass  can  be  otherwise  than 
helpful  in  the  highest  and  best  sense  to  the  great  majority  of  the  American  peo- 
ple. 

Mr.  Reagan's  amendment  having  been  modified  to  read  as  follows: 

"Sec.  3.  That  the  certificates  provided  for  in  the  second  sectioa  of  this  act  shall 
be  of  denominations  of  not  less  than  one  nor  more  than  one  hundred  dollars,  and 
such  certificates  shall  be  redeemable  in  coin  of  standard  value.  A  suflicient  sum 
to  carry  out  the  provisions  of  this  act  is  hereby  appropriat-^d  out  of  any  money  in 
the  Treasury  not  otherwise  appropriated.  The  provision  in  section  1  of  the  act  of 
February  28,  1878,  entitled  '  An  act  to  authorize  the  coinage  of  the  standard  dol- 
lar and  to  restore  its  legal-tender  character,'  which  requires  the  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury  to  purchase,  at  the  market  price  thereof,  not  less  than  $2,000,000  worth  of 
silver  bullion  per  month  nor  more  than  $4,000,000  worth  per  month  of  such  bul- 
lion, is  hereby  repealed." 

It  was  adopted  without  a  yea  and  nay  vote. 

Mr.  SHERMAN.  Now  I  ask  that  quiet  be  restored  long  enough  to  have  this  bill 
amended  as  it  is,  read  carefally  by  the  Secretary,  so  that  we  may  understand  it. 

Mr.  TELLER.    Before  that  is  done  I  wish  to  move  an  amend rnent: 

"That  the  certificates  provided  for  in  this  act  shall  be  receivable  for  all  taxes  and 
dues  to  the  United  States  of  every  description,  and  shall  be  a  lawful  tender  for  the 
payment  of  all  debts,  public  and  private." 

I  offer  that  as  an  additional  section. 

Then  followed  a  discussion  on  legal  tender,  participated  in  by 
Messrs.  Blair,  Gray,  Teller,  Spooner,  and  Morgan. 

Mr.  EUSTIS.  I  offer  the  following  amendment  to  the  amendment  proposed  bj 
the  Senator  from  Colorado:  After  the  words  "that  the  certificates  provided  for  in 
this  act,"  I  move  to  insert  "and  all  silver  certificates  already  issued ;"  so  that  ther« 
will  be  no  discrimination  between  silver  certificates. 

The  PRESIDING  OFFICER.  The  question  is  on  the  amendment  of  the  Sena- 
tor from  Colorado  [Mr.  Teller]  as  modified. 

Mr.  SHERMAN.    I  call  for  the  yeas  and  nays. 

The  yeas  and  nays  were  ordered ;  and  the  Secretary  proceeded  to  call  the  roll. 


101 


The  result  was  announced — yeas  34,  nays  22  ;  as  follows 

YEAS— 34. 


yien, 

Colquitt, 

Jones  of  Ark. 

Plumb, 

Teller, 

Bate, 

Daniel, 

Jones  of  Nev. 

Pugh, 

Turpie, 

3erry, 

Dolph, 

Kenna, 

Ransom, 

Vest, 

3utler, 

Eustis, 

Mitchell, 

Reagan, 

Voorhees, 

Cameron, 

George, 

Moody, 

Sanders, 

"Walthall, 

Dockrell, 

Hearst, 

Morgan, 

Squire, 

Wolcott. 

IJoke, 

Ingalls, 

Paddock, 

NAYS- 

_oo 

Stewart, 

Udrich, 

Chandler, 

Gibson, 

Hoar, 

Stockbi  idge, 

\.lli8on, 

Dawes, 

Gorman, 

McPherson, 

Washburn. 

Blair, 

Edmunde, 

Hale, 

Payne, 

Bloduett, 

Evarts, 

Harris, 

Sawyer, 

Carlisle, 

Frj'e, 

Hiscock, 

Spooner, 

So  the  amendment  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  PLUMB.  I  move  to  insert  as  a  new  section,5to  come  in  iromediately  after 
,be  section  just  adopted : 

"  Sec.  5.  The  owners  of  bullion  deposited  for  coinage  shall  have  the  option  to 
■eceive  coin  or  Us  equivalent  in  the  certificates  provided  for  in  this  act,  and  such 
jullion  shall  be  subsequently  coined."  ^.. 

That  is  to  cover  the  contingency  that  the  Treasury  Department  may  not  at  the 
dme  of  the  presentation  be  in  condition  to  coin  it  on  account  of  lack  of  proper  fa- 
lilities.  Bullion  therefore  may  be  taken  in  and  the  coinage  occur  at  a  subsequent 
period,  at  the  convenience  of  the  officers  of  the  Mint  and  of  the  Secretary  of  the 
treasury. 

The  VICE-PRESIDENT.  The  question  is  on  agreeing  to  the  amendment  pro- 
ijosed  by  the  Senator  from  Kansas  [Mr.  Plumb]. 

The  amendment  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  ALDRICH.  I  ask  that  the  bill  as  it  now  stands  may  be  read  for  the  infor- 
mation of  the  Senate. 

The  VICE-PRESIDENT.    The  bill  as  it  now  stands  amended  will  be  reported. 

The  Chief  Clerk  read  as  follows  : 

"That  from  and  after  the  date  and  passage  of  this  act  the  unit  of  value  in  the 
Qnited  States  shall  be  the  dollar,  and  the  same  may  be  coined  of  412^  grains  of 
standard  silver,  or  of  25.8  grains  of  standaid  gold;  and  the  said  coins  shall  be 
legal  tender  for  all  debts,  public  and  private.  That  hereafter  any  owner  of  silver 
or  gold  bullion  may  deposit  the  same  at  any  mint  of  the  United  States  to  be 
formed  into  standard  dollars  or  bars  for  his  benefit  and  without  charge;  but  it 
shall  be  lawful  to  refuse  any  deposit  of  less  value  than  $100,  or  atiy  bullion  so  base 
as  to  be  unsuitable  for  the  operations  of  the  mint. 

"  Sec.  2.  That  the  provision  of  section  3  of  '  An  act  to  authorize  the  coinasre  of 
khe  standard  silver  dollar  and  to  restore  its  legal  tender  character,'  which  became 
a  law  February  28, 1878,  is  hereby  made  applicable  to  the  coinage  in  this  act  pro- 
vided for. 

"  Sec.  3.  That  the  certificates  provided  for  in  the  second  section  of  this  act  shall 
be  of  denominations  of  not  less  than  one  nor  more  than  one  hundred  dollarp,  and 
8uch  certificates  shall  be  redeemable  in  coin  of  standard  value.  A  sufficient  sum 
to  carry  out  the  provisions  of  this  act  is  hereby  appropriated  out  of  any  money  in 
the  Treasury  not  otherwise  appropriated.  The  provision  in  section  1  of  the  act  of 
February  28,  1878,  entitled  'An  act  to  authorize  the  coinage  of  the  standard  dollar 
and  to  restore  its  legal-tender  character,'  which  requires  the  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury  to  purchase,  at  the  market  price  thereof,  not  less  than  $2,000,000  worth  of 
silver  bullion  per  month  nor  more  than  $4,000,000  worth  per  month  of  such  bullion, 
is  hereby  repealed. 

"  Sec.  4.  That  the  certificates  provided  for  in  this  act  and  all  silver  and  gold  cer- 
tificates already  issued  shall  be  receivable  for  all  taxes  and  dues  to  the  United 
States  of  every  description  and  shall  be  a  legal  tender  for  the  payment  of  all  debts, 
public  and  private. 


102 


"  Sec.  5.  The  owners  of  bullion  deposited  for  coinage  shall  have  the  option  to 
receive  coin  or  its  equivalent  in  the  certificates  provided  for  in  this  act,  and  such 
bullion  shall  be  subsequently  coined. 

"  Sec.  6.  That  upon  the  passage  of  this  act  the  balances  standing  with  the  Treasurear 
of  the  United  States  to  the  respective  credits  of  national  banks  for  deposits  made 
to  redeem  the  circulating  notes  of  such  banks,  and  all  deposits  thereafter  received 
for  like  purpose,  shall  be  covered  into  the  Treasury  as  a  miscellaneous  receipt,  and 
the  Treasurer  of  the  United  States  shall  redeem  from  the  general  cash  in  the 
Treasury  the  circulating  notes  of  said  banks  which  may  come  into  his  possession 
subject  to  redemption ;  and  upon  the  certificate  of  the  Comptroller  of  the  Current^ 
that  such  notes  have  been  received  by  him  and  that  they  have  been  destroyed 
and  that  no  new  notes  will  be  issued  in  their  place,  reimbursement  of  their  amoant 
shall  be  made  to  the  Treasurer,  under  such  regulations  as  the  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury  may  prescribe,  from  an  appropriation  hereby  created,  to  be  known  as 
'  National-bank  notes :  Redemption  account,'  but  the  provisions  of  this  act  shall  not 
apply  to  the  deposits  received  under  section  3  of  the  act  of  June  20,  1874,  requir- 
ing every  National  bank  to  keep  in  lawful  money  with  the  Treasurer  of  the  United 
States  a  sum  equal  to  5  per  centum  of  its  circulation,  to  be  held  and  used  for  the 
redemption  of  its  circulating  notes ;  and  the  balance  remaining  of  the  deposits  so 
covered  shall,  at  the  close  of  each  month,  be  reported  on  the  monthly  public-debt 
statement  as  debt  of  the  United  States  bearing  no  interest." 

The  VICE-PRESIDENT.  If  there  be  no  further  amendment  as  in  Committee 
of  the  Whole  the  bill  will  be  reported  to  the  Senate. 

The  bill  was  reported  to  the  Senate  as  amended. 

The  VICE-PRESIDENT.  The  question  is  on  concurring  in  the  amendments 
made  as  in  Committee  of  the  Whole. 

Mr.  EDMUNDS.    Let  us  have  the  yeas  and  nays  on  that. 

The  yeas  and  nays  were  ordered ;  and  the  Secretary  proceeded  to  call  the  roll. 

The  result  was  announced — yeas  41,  nays  26  ;  as  follows  : 


YEAS— 41. 

Bate, 

Daniel, 

Kenna, 

Power, 

Vance, 

Berry, 

Eustis, 

Manderson, 

Pugh, 

Vest, 

Blodgett, 

George, 

Mitchell, 

Ransom, 

Voorhees, 

Butler, 

Gorman, 

Moody, 

Reagan, 

Walthall, 

Call, 

Harris, 

Morgan, 

Sanders, 

Wolcott. 

Cameron, 

Hearst, 

Paddock, 

Squire, 

Cockrell, 

Ingalls, 

Pasco, 

Stewart, 

Coke, 

Jones  of  Ark. 

Payne, 

Teller, 

Colquitt, 

Jones  of  Nev. 

Plumb, 
NAYS— 26. 

Turpie, 

Aid  rich. 

Cullom, 

Hale, 

Pierce, 

Washburn, 

Allen, 

Dawes, 

Hawley, 

Piatt, 

Wilson  of  Md. 

Allison, 

Edmunds, 

Hiscock, 

Sawyer, 

Blair, 

Evarts, 

Hoar, 

Sherman, 

Casey, 

Frye, 

McPherson, 

Spooner, 

Chandler, 

Gray, 

Morrill, 

Stockbridgf, 

So  the  amendments  made  in  Committee  of  the  Whole  were  con- 
curred in. 

The  VICE-PRESIDENT.  The  bill  is  still  before  the  Senate  and  open  to  amend- 
ment. 

;Mr.  CHANDLER.    I  move  to  amend  the  bill  by  adding  a  new  section,  as  follows : 

"No  gold  or  silver  bullion  shall  be  received  by  the  Treasury  Department  under 
this  act  except  such  as  shall  be  shown  to  be  the  product  of  mines  within  the  United 
States." 

Mr.  TELLER.     I  move  to  lay  that  amendment  on  the  table. 

The  VICE-PRESIDENT.  The  question  is  on  the  motion  of  the  Senator  from 
Colorado  to  lay  the  amendment  offered  by  the  Senator  from  New  Hampshire  on 
the  table. 

Mr.  CHANDLER.     On  that  motion  I  call  for  the  yeas  and  nays. 


103 


The  yeas  and  nays  were  ordered,  and  the  Secretary  proceeded  to 
call  the  roll. 

The  roll-call  havingbeen  concluded,  the  result  was  announced — yeai 
42,  nays  19;  as  follows  : 

YEAS— 42. 


Allen, 

Colquitt, 

Ingalls, 

Plumb, 

Turpie, 

Bate, 

CuUom, 

Jones  of  Ark. 

Power, 

Vance, 

Berry, 

Daniel, 

Jones  of  Nev. 

PDgh, 

Vest, 

Blodgett, 

Eustis, 

Kenna, 

Ransom, 

Voorhees, 

Butler, 

George, 

Mitchell, 

Reagan, 

Walthall, 

Call, 

Gorman, 

Moody, 

Sanders, 

Wolcott. 

Cameron, 

Gray, 

Morgan, 

Squire, 

Cockrell, 

Harris, 

Pasco, 

Stewart, 

Coke, 

Hearst, 

Payne, 

NAYS— 19. 

Teller, 

Aldrich, 

Dawes, 

Hale, 

Paddock, 

Spooner, 

Blair, 

Edmunds, 

Hiscock, 

Pierce, 

Stock  bridge, 

Casey, 

Evarts, 

Hoar, 

Piatt, 

Washburn. 

Chandler, 

Frye, 

Morrill, 

Sawyer,   , 

So  the  amendment  was  laid  on  the  table. 

The  VICE-PRESIDENT.  If  there  be  no  further  amendment  proposed,  the 
question  is.  Shall  the  amendments  be  engrossed  and  the  bill  be  read  a  third  time? 

The  amendments  were  ordered  to  be  engrossed  and  the  bill  to  be  read  a  third 
time. 

The  bill  was  read  the  third  time. 

Vote  on  the  Final  Passage  op  the  Bill. 

Mr.  EDMUNDS.    On  the  passage  of  the  bill  I  demand  the  yeas  and  nays. 

The  VICE-PRESIDENT.  The  question  is.  Shall  the  bill  pass  on  which  the  yeas 
and  nays  are  demanded  ? 

The  yeas  and  nays  were  ordered,  and  the  Secretary  proceeded  to  call  the  roll. 

Mr.  ALLISON.  I  desire  to  say  that  my  colleague  [Mr.  Wilson],  being  absent  on 
account  of  illness,  is  paired  on  this  question  with  the  Senator  from  California  [Mr. 
Stanford].    If  my  colleague  were  present,  he  would  vote  in  the  negative. 

The  result  was  announced — yeas  42,  nays  25  ;  as  follows  : 

YEAS— 42. 


Bate, 

Daniel, 

Kenna, 

Plumb, 

Turpie, 

Berry, 

Eustis, 

Manderson, 

Power, 

Vance, 

Blodgett, 

George, 

Mitchell, 

Pugh, 

Vest, 

Butler, 

Gorman, 

Moody, 

Ransom, 

Voorhees, 

Call, 

Harris, 

Morgan, 

Reagan, 

Walthall, 

Cameron, 

Hearst, 

Paddock, 

Sanders, 

Wolcott. 

Cockrell, 

Ingalls, 

PdSCO, 

Squire, 

Coke, 

Jones  of  Ark, 

Payne, 

St'^wart, 

Colquitt, 

Jones  of  Nev., 

Pierce, 
NAYS— 25. 

Teller, 

Aldrich, 

Chandler, 

Frye, 

Hoar, 

Sherman, 

Allen, 

CuUom, 

Gray, 

McPherson. 

Spooner, 

Allison, 

Dawes, 

Hale, 

Morrill, 

Stockbridge, ' 

Blair, 

Edmunds, 

Haw  ley. 

Piatt, 

Washburn. 

Casey, 

Evarts, 

Hiscock, 

Sawyer, 

Wilson  of  Md. 

So  the  bill  was  passed. 


104 

Mr.  PLUMB.  I  move  to  amend  the  title  so  as  to  read :  "A  bill  to  provide  for  the 
free  coinage  of  gold  and  silver  bullion,  and  for  other  purposes." 

The  VICE-PRESIDENT.  The  amendment  to  the  title  will  be  considered  as 
agreed  to,  if  there  be  no  objection.    The  Chair  hears  none. 

The  bill  as  it  passed  the  Senate  was  as  perfect  a  free  coinage 
measure  as  could  be  desired.  The  first  section  restored  the  unit  to 
both  metals,  as  in  the  act  of  1792,  made  the  coinage  of  both  metals 
free,  and  made  silver  as  well  as  gold  full  legal  tender  for  all  purposes. 

It  also  made  all  certificates  issued  on  either  gold  or  silver,  legal 
tender  for  all  debts,  public  and  private. 

This  bill  will  stand  as  a  monument  of  the  wisdom  of  the  Senate, 
and  is  evidence  that  on  this  great  question  the  Senate  was  in  closer 
touch  with  the  people  than  the  House,  and  if  the  bill,  as  it  passed 
the  Senate,  had  become  a  law  it  would  have  settled  forever  the  silver 
question. 

From  an  analysis  of  the  foregoing  votes  it  will  be  seen  that  the 
only  Senator  west  of  the  Missouri  River  who  voted  against  free 
eoinage  was  Mr.  Allen,  of  Washington.  Mr.  Dolph,  of  Oregon, 
however,  spoke  against  silver,  and  was  paired  against  the  bill,  and 
did  not  vote  at  all. 

Of  the  Iowa  Senators  Mr.  Wilson  stood  paired  against  free  coin- 
age, and  Mr.  Allison  voted  the  same  way. 

Between  the  Mississippi  and  the  Ohio  Rivers,  the  Senators  frora 
Illinois,  Wisconsin,  Michigan,  and  Mr.  Sherman,  of  Ohio,  voted 
against  the  bill,  or  were  paired  against  it.  Mr,  Payne,  of  Ohio, 
voted  for  the  bill. 

Of  the  Eastern  Senators,  only  Mr.  Cameron,  of  Pennsylvania,  Re- 
publican ;  and  Mr.  Gorman,  of  Maryland,  and  Mr.  Blodgett,  of  New- 
Jersey,  Democrats,  voted  for  the  bill. 

Thus  the  bill  went  back  to  the  House  with  the  subsitution  of  free 
coinage  in  lieu  of  the  purchase  of  four  and  a  half  millions  worth  of 
silver  a  month,  with  bullion  redemption. 

The  Debate  in  the  Senate. 

The  debate  in  the  Senate  on  the  silver  question  during  the  session 
just  closed  will  undoubtedly  be  accepted  as  the  ablest  that  has  ever 
taken  place  on  the  money  question  in  the  American  Congress. 
And,  so  far  as  pertains  to  the  discussion  of  monetary  principles,  it  is 
doubtful  if  a  parallel  can  be  found  in  the  debates  in  any  parliamen- 
tary body. 

The  debate  with  which  it  would  naturally  be  compared  is  the  great 
debate  in  the  British  Parliament  preceding  the  act  of  1844,  which 


105 

has  become  memorable  in  the  history  of  monetary  legislation.  The 
literature  that  preceded,  and  which  sprung  from  this  debate,  is,  per- 
haps, the  richest  extant  relating  to  the  subject  of  money.  This 
debate  settled  forever,  for  English-speaking  people,  the  principle  that 
the  regulation  of  money  belongs  to  the  State  and  can  not  safely  be 
left  to  the  control  of  private  interests. 

To  appreciate  the  full  merits  of  the  debate  in  the  Senate  it  is  neces- 
sary to  follow  it  carefully  through.  Many  of  the  speeches  were 
masterly  productions.  All  phases  of  the  subject  were  discussed  and 
from  all  points  of  view. 

It  would  be  impossible,  by  short  extracts,  to  give  anything  like  a 
fair  exposition  of  the  debate,  and,  therefore,  that  will  not  be  at- 
tempted. 

A  few  extracts,  however,  bearing  directly  on  the  bill  under  consid- 
eration are  here  given. 

In  the  speech  of  Senator  Jones,  of  Nevada,  every  phase  of  the 
money  question  is  fully  and  ably  discussed.  The  speech  as  a  whole 
will  take  a  foremost  place  in  monetary  literature,  and  be  read  by  the 
student  of  economic  science  as  well  for  the  clearness  with  which 
it  discusses  monetary  principles  as  for  the  fullness  of  the  information 
it  contains. 

Only  a  few  extracts,  giving  a  few  leading  principles,  however,  can 

be  given  here  : 

Cause  op  a  Fall  of  Prices. 

When  a  fall  of  prices  is  found  operating,  not  on  one  article  or  class  of  articles 
alone,  but  on  the  products  of  all  industries ;  when  found  to  be  not  confined  to  any 
one  climate,  country,  or  race  of  people,  but  to  diffuse  itself  over  the  civilized  world  ; 
when  it  is  found  not  to  be  a  characteristic  of  any  one  year,  but  to  go  on  progress- 
ively for  a  series  of  years,  it  becomes  manifest  that  it  does  not  and  can  not  arise 
from  local,  temporary  or  subordinate  causes,  but  mitet  have  its  genesis  and  devel- 
opment in  some  principle  of  universal  application. 

Stable  Monky. 

With  an  advancing  civilization,  in  which  a  large  volume  of  business  is  conducted 
©n  a  basis  of  credit  extending  over  long  periods,  it  is  of  the  uttermost  importance 
that  money,  which  is  the  measure  of  all  equities,  should  be  kept  unchanging  in 
value  through  time. 

An  Increasing  Money  Unit. 

It  is  only  within  a  comparatively  recent  period  that  an  increasing  value  in  the 
money  unit  could  produce  such  widespread  disturbance  of  industry  as  it  produces 
to-day.  In  the  rude  periods  of  society  commerce  was  by  barter ;  and  even  for 
thousands  of  years  after  the  introdnction  of  money,  credit,  where  known  at  all,  was 
extremely  limited.  Under  such  circumstances  changes  in  the  volume  and  in  the 
value  of  money,  while  operating  to  the  disadvantage  of  society  as  a  whole,  could 
not  instantly  or  seriously  affect  any  one  individual. 

It  is  my  firm  conviction  that  the  inexpressible  miseries  inflicted  upon  mankind 
by  war,  pestilence,  and  famine  have  been  less  cruel,  unpitying,  and  unrelenting 
than  the  persistent  and  remorseless  exactions  which  this  inexorable  enemy  has 
made  upon  society. 


106 

Contrary  to  all  principles  of  progress  and  of  natural  justice,  the  man  who  keeps 
his  money  idle,  and  deprives  society  of  its  use,  is  rewarded  by  an  unearned  incre- 
ment, while  he  who  puts  his  money  into  active  business  where  industry  and  labor 
may  profit  by  it,  is  punished  by  unmerited  loss. 

The  Creditoes'  Demand  for  the  "  Best  Money." 

The  creditors  tell  us  that  all  they  want  is  "  good  money."  They  and  their  friends 
glibly  insist  that  all  obligations  must  be  paid  in  "  the  best  money."  This  is  the 
delicate  and  plausible  euphemism  resorted  to  in  order  to  gloss  over  and,  if  possible, 
hide  from  the  world  the  odious  and  repulsive  fact  that  what  the  creditors  always 
want  is  the  dearest  money — the  money  that  costs  the  people  the  most  sweat  and 
toil  to  obtain,  and  which,  as  time  passes,  grows  dearer  and  dearer. 

A  distinguished  official  of  the  Government,  who  was  before  a  committee  of  this 
body  the  other  day,  insisted  that  the  proposed  Treasury  notes  should  be  redeemed 
in  the  "  best  money."  I  asked  him  what  was  the  ''best  money."  "  Why,"  he  said. 
"  the  money  that  is  worth  the  most."  Now,  it  strikes  me,  Mr.  President,  that  if 
you  have  borrowed  a  aoUar  and,  through  a  badly  regulated  money-system,  are 
made  to  pay  a  dollar  worth  25  per  cent,  more  than  the  dollar  you  borrowed,  you 
are  not  paying  the  best  money,  but  the  worst  money  ;  not  an  honest  dollar,  but  a 
swindling  and  dishonest  dollar. 

According  to  all  fair  canons  of  construction  the  best  money  should  be  and  is  a 
money  of  unchanging  value,  a  money  that  exacts  from  the  debtor  the  same  amount 
of  sacrifice  that  he  bargained  for,  and  which  is  all  that  the  creditor  is  equitably 
entitled  to  receive. 

According  to  the  admissions  of  the  royal  commission  of  England,  the  gold  dol- 
lar of  to-day  is  to  the  producers  of  this  country,  measured  by  their  products,  al- 
ready at  a  premium  of  between  30  and  40  per  cent.,  over  the  gold  dollar  of  1873. 

The  Quantitative  Theory  of  Money — The  Value  of  Each  Dollar  Depends  on 
THE  Number  of  Dollars  Out. 

Thus  by  the  universal  competition  to  get  it  the  value  of  the  dollar  is  made  to 
depend  upon  the  number  of  dollars  that  are  out.  This  is  a  principle  that  lies 
at  the  very  foundation  of  the  science  of  money.  The  law,  stated  broadly,  is  that 
the  value  of  each  unit  of  money  in  any  country  at  any  given  time  depends  on  the 
whole  number  of  units  in  circulation  in  that  country.  The  larger  the  number  of 
units  out,  population  remaining  the  same,  the  less  must  be  the  value  of  each  unit; 
the  smaller  the  number  of  units  out,  population  remaining  the  same,  the  greater 
the  value  of  each. 

Creditors  and  Debtors — A  Comparison  of  Motives. 

All  movements  for  the  increase  of  the  monetary  circulation  are  ascribed  by  the 
money-lenders  and  creditor  diasses  to  the  unworthy  desire  on  the  part  of  the 
debtors  to  escape  their  just  obligations.  But  if  motives  are  to  be  brought  in  ques- 
tion, the  rule  should  work  both  ways.  No  note  is  taken  of  the  motive  of  the 
creditor  classes  in  securing  a  contraction  of  the  circulation.  Whatever  the  appar- 
ent purpose  of  contraction,  and  however  specious  the  arguments  advanced  in  its 
justification,  the  real  object  has  always  been  to  increase  the  purchasing  power  of 
money.  In  all  countries,  and  throughout  all  time,  it  is  the  cupidity  of  the  creditor 
classes  and  annuitants,  and  their  desire  to  increase  the  value  of  the  money  unit 
that  has  brought  about  a  shrinkage  in  the  money  volume.  Unlike  the  great 
masses  of  the  people,  who  were  ignorant  of  the  effects  to  be  naturally  expected 
from  such  a  shrinkage,  the  annuitants  and  moneyed  men  very  well  understood 
that  the  value  of  every  pound  or  dollar  depended  on  the  number  of  pounds  or 
dollars  that  were  in  circulation ;  the  larger  the  total  number  out,  the  smaller  the 
purchasing  power  of  each  ;  the  smaller  the  total  number  out,  the  greater  the  pur- 
chasing power  of  each. 

Who  Are  the  Borrowers. 

In  all  discussions  of  the  subject  the  creditors  attempt  to  brush  aside  the  equities 
involved  by  sneering  at  the  debtors.  But  Mr.  President,  debt  is  the  distinguish- 
ing characteristic  of  modern  society.  It  is  through  debt  that  the  marvelous  de- 
velopments of  nineteenth  century  civilization  have  been  eff'ected.  Who  are  the 
debtors  in  this  country  ?    Who  are  the  borrowers  of  money?    The  men  of  en- 


107 

terprise,  of  energy,  of  skill,  the  men  of  industry,  of  foresight,  of  calculation,  of 
daring.  In  the  ranks  of  the  debtors  will  be  found  a  large  preponderance  of  the 
constructive  energy  of  every  country.  The  debtors  are  the  upbuilders  of  the  na- 
tional wealth  and  prosperity  ;  they  are  the  men  of  initiative,  the  men  who  con- 
ceive plans  and  set  on  foot  enterprises.  They  are  those  who,  by  borrowing  money, 
enrich  the  community.  They  are  the  dynamic  force  among  the  people.  They  are 
the  busy,  restless,  moving  throng  whom  you  find  in  all  walks  of  lite  in  this  country 
— the  active,  the  vigorous,  the  strong,  the  undaunted. 

Silver  Has  Not  Fallen  in  Value. 

It  is  a  significant  fact  that  every  silver  dollar  that  has  been  coined  under  that  act 
is  at  a  parity  with  gold,  and  will  to-day  buy  as  much  of  all  ihe  objects  of  human 
desire  as  will  the  gold  dollar.  Nay,  more,  silver  bullion — disparaged  and  discredited 
as  it  is  by  being  shorn  of  the  money  function  and  denied  access  to  the  mints,  in- 
stead of  decreasing  in  purchasing  power  has  maintained  so  steady  a  relation  to 
eommodities  that  412.T  grains  of  uncoined  silver  will  exchange  for  as  much  to-day 
as  would  the  coined  dollar,  whether  of  silver  or  gold,  in  1873,  when  the  full  money 
function  attached  equally  to  both  metals.  If  this  be  true — and  I  shall  presently 
demonstrate  it  beyond  refutation — what  an  utter  perversion  of  terms  it  is  to  say 
that  silver  has  fallen  in  value? 

Message  from  England. 

I  will  read  a  cable  dispatch  recently  addressed  to  me  by  Mr.  Henry  H.  Gibbs, 
formerly  governor  of  the  Bank  of  England,  and  now  president  of  the  Bimetallfc 
League  of  Great  Britain  : 

"  London,  May  6. — The  friends  of  silver  deeply  regret  the  death  of  Senator  Beck, 
whose  services  in  the  cause  of  monetary  reform  are  mo9t  warmly  appreciated  on 
this  side  of  the  Atlantic.  The  bimetallist  party  of  the  United  Kingdom,  now  in- 
cluding over  one  hundred  members  of  the  House  of  Commons,  attach  the  greatest 
value  to  the  debate  about  to  commence  in  your  illustrious  chamber.  We  fully 
recognize  not  only  that  the  support  afforded  to  silver  by  your  legislation  during 
the  last  twelve  years  has  helped  to  protect  the  industrial  world  from  an  acute 
monetary  crisis,  tut  also  that  the  debates  in  Congress  have  served  more  than  all 
else  to  educate  our  people  to  recognition  of  the  importaLt  issues  involved.  We 
believe  also  that  the  increase  and  coinage  of  silver  contemplated  by  Congress  will 
restore,  wholly  or  considerably,  your  coinage  rates,  and  will  thus  make  interna- 
tional settlement  of  this  complex  question  comparatively  easy.  We  anticipate 
further,  and  with  much  confidence,  that  the  advance  in  the  price  of  silver  whick 
must  follow  your  action  will  stimulate  both  the  export  and  the  other  trades  of  your 
•ountry,  and,  while  tending  to  the  prosperity  of  your  agricultural  classes,  will  also 
assist  the  manufacturing  industries  of  the  United  Kingdom  and  the  whole  body  of 
our  wage  earners." 

To  fully  appreciate  this  speech  it  must  be  read  as  a  whole. 
Senator  Teller,  in  an  able  speech,  replying  to  Mr.  Sherman,  said  : 

Every  Senator  who  has  spoken  against  free  coinage  during  this  debate  has  as- 
sumed that  all  advocates  of  free  coinage  are  expansionists  to  begin  with;  that 
they  are  in  favor  of  an  undue  expansion  of  the  circulating  medium  of  this  coun- 
try. It  has  been  assumed,  in  the  second  place,  that  we  were  for  the  repudiation 
of  the  public  debt  and  that  we  were  for  putting  private  debtors  in  a  condition  to 
^scale  down  their  debts.  I  deny  this.  I  deny  that  the  men  who  to-day  stand  in 
the  front  rank  as  defenders  of  silver  as  money,  not  only  in  this  country,  but  all  over 
the  world,  are  tainted  in  that  way.  And  here  I  may  say  that  in  every  country, 
among  civilized  men,  some  of  the  brightest  and  ablest  men  of  to-day  in  public 
and  private  life  are  the  advocates  of  the  unlimited  use  of  silver  on  equal  terms 
with  gold. 

Great  Britain  has  a  hundred  members  of  Parliament,  and  she  has  a  number  of 
directors  of  her  great  banks,  and  a  number  of  the  very  highest  in  learning  and  in 
ability  of  her  public  teachers  who  are  in  favor  of  the  use  of  the  double  standard. 
If  you  go  to  the  continent  of  Europe  you  will  find  the  great  banks  of  diflerent 
continental  countries  contain  more  or  less  of  people  who  insist  that  the  free  use 
of  silver  is  indispensable  to  commercial  prosperity,  to  commercial  success,  and  to 


108 

human  progress  and  human  happiness.  No  more  illustrious  examples  can  be 
found  anywhere  than  can  be  found  on  the  Continent ;  men  like  Professor  Lave^eye, 
of  the  Liege  University,  who  has  a  world-wide  reputation  as  a  political  economist ; 
Mr.  Pearson,  who  presides  over  the  Bank  of  The  Netherlands,  and  the  countless 
number  of  men  in  public  positions  and  in  private  places  who  have  given  their  besfc 
thoughts  and  attention  to  this  subject,  and  are  neither  repudiationists  nor  inflation- 
ists. 

*  ****** 

The  Senator  from  Vermont  [Mr.  Morrill]  assumed — and  I  venture  to  refer  to 
it  because  he  assumed  it  in  relation  to  myself— that  I  was  anxious  to  get  on  a  silver 
basis.  I  have  denied  that  I  was  in  favor  of  a  silver  basis  from  my  seat  in  the 
Senate;  I  have  denied  it  on  the  public  rostrum  and  through  the  press,  and  there 
is  no  excuse  for  the  Senator  from  Vermont  or  anybody  else  charging  that  either 
I  or  very  many  others  who  associate  with  me  in  their  views  on  this  subject  are  in 
favor  of  a  silver  basis.  I  have  said,  and  I  repeat,  that  if  we  can  have  but  one 
money  metal  the  interest  of  this  country  and  the  interest  of  the  world  demand 
that  it  shall  be  silver.  On  that  question  I  am  borne  out,  as  I  say,  by  very  many- 
men  in  this  country  and  abroad. 

It  has  been  demonstrated  beyond  the  possibility  of  a  doubt  that  there  is  not  gold 
enough  in  the  world  and  there  is  not  being  produced  enough  to  carry  on  the  busi- 
ness of  the  world  upon  gold  alone. 

Mr.  Teller  quotes  from  Mr.  Sherman  as  follows  : 

"  The  gold  standard  has  been  the  recognized  policy  of  all  the  great  political  par- 
ties that  have  longest  controlled  the  Government  of  the  United  States.  The  Fed- 
eral party  in  the  beginning  sought  to  secure  it  by  ascertaining  the  precise  relative 
market  value  of  the  two  metals  and  coining  both  as  money,  but  erroneously  fixed 
the  ratio  at  15  to  1. 

"  GeneralJackson  and  Benton  and  their  associates  in  1834,  with  the  avowed  pur- 
pose to  restore  gold,  or  "  Benton  mint  drops,"  as  they  were  called,  to  circulation, 
changed  the  ratio  to  16  to  1,  but  this  banished  all  silver  coin.  In  the  Administra- 
tion of  President  Pierce  in  1853  the  present  system  was  adopted,  by  which  gold  be- 
came the  unit  of  value  and  the  coinage  of  silver  was  made  subsidiary,  but  was 
always  maintained  in  purchasing  power  the  equal  of  gold,  dollar  for  dollar." 

To  this,  Mr.  Teller  replied : 

Mr.  President,  I  challenge  that  statement.  I  assert  that  it  is  untrue,  whether  it 
comes  from  an  ex-Secretary  of  the  Treasury  or  whether  it  comes  from  any  body 
else.  There  never  was  an  hour  previous  to  1873  when  the  gold  dollar  was  the  unit  of 
value  in  this  country.  The  silver  dollar  was  the  unit  of  value  clear  up  to  the  pas- 
sage of  the  act  of  1873. 

Not  only  that  — 

But  the  minor  coins,  the  half-dollars  and  quarter-dollars  were  legal  tender  for 
all  purposes  at  that  time  and  of  full  weight;  and  not  only  were  they  legal  tenders, 
but  the  Spanish  milled  dollar,  the  Mexican  dollar,  and  the  Mexican  quarter- 
dollars  were  also  legal  tender;  and  there  are  plenty  of  Senators  here  who  remem- 
ber that  in  their  youth  the  Spanish  milled  dollar  and  the  Spanish  quarter  and  the 
Mexican  dollar  and  the  Mexican  quarter  were  the  common  currency  of  our  coun- 
try. I  have  not  any  doubt  that  two-thirds  of  the  lands  in  the  State  of  Illinois 
were  entered  with  foreign  silver  money  at  the  Government  offices,  where  it  was 
taken  by  law  just  as  they  would  have  taken  a  quarter  silver  dollar  of  our  own 
coinage  if  it  had  been  presented. 

Mr.  Sherman  seemed  to  be  possessed  of  the  idea  that  we  always 
had  in  this  country  a  single  standard,  either  of  gold  or  of  silver. 
He  claims  because  at  one  period  silver  was  overvalued  and  gold  left 
us,  and  at  another  period  gold  was  overvalued  and  silver  left  us,  that, 
therefore,  our  money  standard  was  at  one  time  only  silver  and  at 
another  only  gold. 


109 

But  the  double  standard  consists  in  the  right  to  use  either  or  loth 
the  metals,  without  limit,  as  money.  The  double  standard  means 
the  right  to  discharge  obligations  in  either  kind  of  money . 

Mr.  Sherman  must  know  that  throughout  both  of  the  periods  re- 
ferred to  gold  and  silver  were  in  use  as  money  in  Europe  and  the 
United  States  without  limitation,  except  in  England  after  1816. 
What  difference  was  there,  then,  in  the  value  of  the  money  whether  the 
gold  and  silver  circulated  half  and  half  in  all  countries,  or  more  of 
one  metal  in  one  country  and  more  of  the  other  metal  in  another 
country  ?  The  two  metals  together  constituted  the  money  of  all  coun- 
tries. According  to  the  reasoning  of  Mr.  Sherman,  if  a  man  carried 
only  gold  in  his  pocket,  he  would  be  on  the  gold  standard,  while  one 
who  carried  only  silver  would  be  on  the  silver  standard,  while  onlj 
the  man  who  carried  half  and  half  of  each  kind  of  money  would  be 
on  the  double  standard  ! 

Bimetallism  is  the  unlimited  use,  or  the  right  to  the  unlimited  use, 
of  both  metals  as  money  in  the  transaction  of  business  and  in  the 
discharge  of  all  obligations;  and  that  was  the  condition  of  the  United 
States  from  the  establishment  of  the  Government  down  to  1873,  when, 
with  .an  enormous  debt  resting  upon  the  country,  this  right  was 
surreptitiously  taken  away. 

The  following  are  a  few  points  from  an  able  and  comprehensive 
speech  by  Mr,  Plumb,  of  Kansas  : 

There  are  two  questions  which  it  seems  to  me  may  be  regarded  in  this  matter 
of  silver  legislation  as  fundamental.  One  is  as  to  the  volume  of  the  currency  and 
the  other  is  as  to  what  the  currency  shall  consist  of. 

******* 

In  this  connection  it  is  worth  while  recalling  the  action  taken  by  Congress  in 
1878.  In  that  year,  the  year  preceding  resumption,  Congress,  after  long  debate, 
determined  upon  a  partial  remonetization  of  silver.  It  restored  to  full  money 
functions  the  silver  dollar  of  4121^  grains,  but  limited  its  coinage  by  providing  that 
thereafter  there  should  not  be  less  than  $2,000,000  per  month  of  silver  coined, 
giving  to  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  the  discretion  to  increase  that  coinage  up 
to  $4,000,000  per  month,  a  discretion  designed  to  meet  such  contingency  as  might 
arise  calling  for  an  increase  in  the  circulating  medium  which  could  not  otherwise 
be  promptly  met. 

At  that  time  there  were  in  circulation  $346,000,000  of  legal-tender  notes — I  speak 
now  in  round  numbers — and  $337,000,000  of  national  bank  notes.  There  were  also 
outstanding  at  that  time  over  $1,700,000,000  interest- bearing  obligations  of  the  Gov- 
ernment, on  which  national-bank  circulation  might  be  based.  It  was  not  then 
anticipated  that  the  circulating  notes  of  the  national  banks  would  diminish;  on  the 
contrary,  it  was  believed  they  would  increase  in  volume.  Any  one  who  had  sug- 
gested that  during  the  succeeding  twelve  years  the  national-bank  circulation  would 
have  nearly  disappeared  would  have  been  regarded  as  visionary.  At  that  time 
Congress,  after  long  debate,  and  by  a  measure  which  passed  over  the  veto  of  the 
President,  said  that  the  currency  of  the  country  should  thereafter  consist  of  the 
$346,000,000  legal-tender  notes  outstanding,  and  not  lees  than  $337,000,000  of 
national-bank  notes,  to  which  should  be  arlded  at  lea«t  two  millions  of  silver  per 
month,  to  be  coined  thereafter  indefinitely;  and  of  course,  all  that  woald  result 
from  the  free  coinage  of  gold. 


110 

At  that  time  the  volume  of  the  business  of  this  country  as  measured  by  bank 
deposits  and  bank  debts,  by  railroad  debts,  by  private  and  municipal  deb*8,  by  the 
sum  of  commercial  transactions,  and  by  all  the  othier  things  which  can  be  made 
use  of  in  determining  volume,  was  not  over-half  of  what  it  ii  to-day.  In  other 
words,  the  business  of  this  country  has  at  least  doubled  during  the  last  twelve 
years.  This  increase  in  business  necessitates  a  great  increaae  in  the  volume  of 
currency  supply.    Let  us  see  how  that  need  has  been  met. 

The  legal-tender  currency  has  not  increased,  but  remains  as  twelve  years  ago, 
except  as  it  may  have  been  diminished  by  loss  or  destruction,  and  the  national- 
bank  circulation,  which  Khortly  after  thesilveractof  1878  increased  to  $356,000,000, 
at  which  sum  it  remained  only  a  short  period  of  time,  has  receded  until,  on  the 
first  day  of  the  present  month,  it  was  only  $128,000,000.  To  cover  increasing  needs, 
and  fill  the  gap  made  by  the  disappearing  national-bank  notes,  there  has  been 
only  the  coinage  of  $2,000,000  worth  per  month  of  silver,  and  what  has  resulted 
from  the  free  coinage  of  gold.  There  has,  therefore,  been  a  contraction  of  the 
currency,  beyond  the  possibility  of  what  was  contemplated  by  those  who  legislated 
upon  this  subject  in  1878,  of  nearly  §240,000,000  since  that  date,  and  their  expecta^ 
tions  and  those  of  the  country  have  been  defeated  to  that  extent. 

As  I  said,  these  anticipations  have  been  defeated,  and  the  circulation  of  the 
country  is  $240,000,000  less  than  the  least  which  the  framers  of  the  act  of  1878  and 
those  who  participated  in  creating  that  financial  policv  which  put  the  country  on 
a  bimetallic  basis  supposed  it  would  be;  and  no  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  has 
purchased  and  had  coined  a  dollar  of  silver  beyond  the  minimum,  notwithstand- 
ing the  steady  decrease  of  national-bank  notes  and  th'i  enormoug  increase  in  the 
business  of  the  country.    The  Treasury  Department  has  always  contributed  to  the 

policy  of  contraction. 

*  *  *  *  *  *  * 

The  Senator  from  New  York  [Mr.  Hiscock]  made  a  great  exhibit  on  yesterday 
of  the  wealth  of  this  country.  It  was  no  doubt  a  correct  one.  But  he  did  not  tefl 
us  whether  the  Finance  Committee  were  debating  whether  they  could  not  make 
it  a  great  deal  better  by  piling  up  the  duties  on  imported  merchaniise  from  10  to 
300  per  cent,  in  the  tarifl'  bill  which  is  before  them.  If  it  is  so  good,  if  there  is  no 
complaint,  no  cloud  in  the  future,  if  there  is  financial  health,  soundness,  prosperity 
and  if  it  is  all  evenly  and  fairly  distributed,  why  not  let  well  enough  alone  in 
matter}  relating  to  the  tariff"  as  well  as  the  volume  of  the  currency  ? 

The  Senator  thinks  we  do  not  need  legislation  increasing  the  currency  because 
of  our  great  prosperity  under  the  present  system.  If  this  is  all  true,  why  revise  the 
tariff  and  especially  impose  new  and  increased  dutiea  ?  Or  are  we  too  prosperous, 
whereby  the  necessity  arises  for  placing  new  burdens  on  the  people  ? 

Referring   to   the  Treasury  proposition    for  bullion    redemption, 

Mr.  Plumb  said  : 

I  can  not  look  upon  the  bill  which  came  from  the  Treasury  Department  with  the 
aanction  of  the  Administration  as  calculated  for  anything  else  so  much  as  to  restore 
the  single  gold  standard — no  more  silver  coinage,  no  more  silver  dollars,  $360,- 
000,000  of  them  added  to  whatever  gold  we  may  accidently  possess  to  be  the  basis 
upon  which  65,O'J0,000  of  people,  increasing  at  the  rate  of  2,000,000  per  annum  must 
hereafterd^  their  business;  silver  to  be  used  only  as  a  commodity,  as  a  basis  for  the 
issue  of  warehouse  certificates.  Mr.  President,  rather  than  to  have  that  bill  become 
a  law  I  would  willingly  see  this  Congress  adjourn  without  one  line  of  legislation  upon 
the  subject  and  carry  this  questiou  to  the  people  and  get  their  final  verdict  upon 
it.  A  return  to  the  gold  standard  would  be  a  far  greater  calamity  than  the  con- 
tinuance for  a  year  or  two  longer  of  the  present  disastrous  policy. 

Mr.  Cockrell,  of  Missouri,  made  a  strong  argument  in  favor  of  the 

equal  use  of  both  gold  and  silver  as  money,  as  a  constitutional  ri^ht. 

He  said  : 

By  our  present  laws  gold  bullion  has  free  coinage  and  can  be  exchanged  at  our 
mints  grain  for  grain  for  gold  coin,  or  can  be  deposited  and  gold  certificates  ob- 
tained therefor,  and  gold  bullion  is  therefore  practically  equal  to  gold  coin  and 
equivalent  to  gold  money. 


Ill 

Under  the  pending;  bill  eilver  bullion  is  still  (o  be  treated  as  a  mere  commodity, 
to  be  purchased  in  the  market  just  as  any  other  metal  can  be  purchased,  and  will 
be  given  none  of  the  equivalents  of  money  or  currency.  Why  continue  this  legal 
discrimination  and  relentless  warfare  against  silver? 

It  has  not  always  been  thus.  By  tlie  common  law  of  England,  transplanted  in 
this  country  by  our  ancestors,  gold  and  silver  were  money  and  a  lawful  tender  for 
the  payment  of  debts  down  to  the  adoption  of  our  written  Constitution. 

■X-  *  *  *  *  ♦  * 

The  Constitution  of  the  United  States  declares  that — 

'H^ongress  sliall  have  power  *  *  *  to  coin  money,  regulate  the  value  thereof, 
and  of  foreign  coin,  and  lix  the  standard  of  weights  and  measures;  *  *  *  to 
provide  for  the  punishment  of  counterfeiting  the  securities  and  current  coin  of  the 
United  States." 

And  further — 

"  No  State  shall  *  *  *  coin  money  *  *  *  or  make  anything  but  gold 
and  silver  coin  a  legal  tender  in  payment  of  debts." 

Congress  therefore  has  the  exclusive  power  to  coin  money  and  to  declare  what 
eoin  shall  pasj  current  as  money  and  to  regulate  and  lix  the  value  of  such  coin 
and  of  foreign  coin  as  money,  as  legal  tender  for  the  payment  of  all  debts,  public 
and  private,  and  no  State  can  coin  any  money  or  make  anything  but  gold  and 
silver  coin  a  tender  in  payment  of  debts.  There  is  no  restriction  upon  the  power 
of  Congress  to  coin  money  and  regulate  its  value,  either  as  to  the  metal  to  be 
coined  into  money  or  the  weight  or  quantity  of  the  metal,  the  value  of  which 
when  coined  Congress  can  regulate  and  fix. 

******  -x- 

The  future  currency  of  this  great  country  should  be,  and  I  hope  will  be,  the  legal- 
tender  United  States  or  Treasury  notes,  coin  certilicates  based  upon  deposits  of 
ooin  or  bullion  of  gold  and  silver,  held  in  the  Treasury  for  their  redemption,  and 
of  actual  coin. 

Such  a  currency  is  demanded  by  our  people  and  is  necessary  for  their  use  as 
money- 
Mr.  Eustis,  of"  Louisiana,  referring  to  the  act  of  1878,  passed  over 
the  veto  of  President  Hayes,  said  : 

Mr.  President  :  I  desire  to  ask  in  the  light  of  experience  what  solitary  individual 
ki  the  United  States  from  1878  to  the  present  moment  has  ever  been  defrauded  by 
fhe  coinage  of  silver?  Who  has  ever  preferred  any  just  complaint  against  this  law 
which  was  passed  over  the  Executive  veto? 

When,  in  other  parts  of  his  message,  the  President  of  the  United  States  used 
the  argument  that  this  law  would  discredit  the  public  faith  and  impair  the  public 
credit,  I  ask,  in  the  light  of  the  experience  of  the  last  twelve  years  since  that  law 
was  passed,  when  was  the  credit  of  the  Government  of  the  United  States  higher 
than  it  has  been  since  that  law  was  passed?  When  was  its  public  faith  more 
sacredly  observed  ?  When  did  its  credit  rank  higher  in  the  estimation  of  the 
world,  in  the  estimation  of  the  bondholders,  in  the  estimation  of  public  creditors 
tlhan  it  has  since  1878  when  that  law  was  passed? 

Mr,  Aldrich,  in  an  elaborate  speech,  favoring  further  international 

action,  admitted,  however,  the  necessity  of  a   readjustment  of  our 

money  system  and  an  increase  of  the  currency.     He  said  : 

The  progressive  retirement  of  national-bank  notes  has  imposed  upon  Congress 
the  duty  of  undertaking  some  readjustment  of  our  currency  system.  A  plan  for 
this  readjustment  is  suggested  by  the  bill  now  under  consideration  reported  from 
the  Committee  on  Finance. 

Among  the  issues  involved  in  the  consideration  of  this  bill  and  the  various  sub- 
stitutes proposed,  the  most  important  from  every  standpoint  is  to  determine  the 
effect  which  the  several  measures  would  have  upon  the  future  status  of  silver  as  a 
money  metal.  The  decision  of  the  United  States  to  promote  the  restoration  of 
silver  was  made  by  the  act  of  Congress  of  February  28,  1878,  and  reaffirmed  by 
the  formal  declaration  of  its  official  representatives  of  the  monetary  conferences 
of  1878  and  1881. 


112 

This  Congress  can  not  pass  an  act  which  will  be  a  finality  upon  this  great  ques- 
tion. It  must  be  tentative  and  experimental ;  a  meapure  liable  to  repeal  or  modi- 
fication in  a  wider  sense  than  is  usual  with  such  acts.  The  final  object  of  our  policy 
is  to  establish  a  legal  equality  between  gold  and  silver.  Gold  is  universally  inter- 
national money  to-day,  silver  is  not ;  it  will  not  be  international  money  should 
this  bill  be  passed.  It  remains  for  the  Legislatures  which  have  given  gold  the 
privilege  by  virtue  of  which  it  holds  its  rank  as  universal  money  to  give  a  similar 
privilege  to  silver.  Until  this  is  done  there  can  be  no  equality  as  money  between 
the  two  metals.  This  is  the  fact  of  all  facts,  and  it  is  useless  for  Senators  to  en- 
deavor to  persuade  themselves  or  attempt  to  persuade  others  to  the  contrary. 
This  fact  defioes  in  advance  the  limitations  upon  the  policy  of  Congress.  It  is 
well  we  should  all  fully  understand  that  the  expectant  attitude  of  the  past  must 
be  maintained. 

The  bill  reported  from  Ihe  Finance  Committee  was  prepared  with  a  view  of 
keeping  within  these  limitations.  To  this  distinctively  pro-silver  measure,  which 
I  believe  to  be  wise  and  conservative,  are  opposed  propositions  for  free  coinage 
and  for  the  unlimited  purchase  of  silver  bullion. 

The  speech  of  Mr.  Stewart,  of  Nevada,  giving  the  full  record  of 
the  act  of  1873  in  the  Senate,  has  been  referred  to,  but  a  correct  idea 
of  it  cannot  be  conveyed  by  extracts  ;  to  understand  the  record  the 
epeecli  must  be  read  in  full. 

Mr.  Mitchell,  of  Oregon,  made  a  speech  early  in  the  session,  con- 
taining valuable  statistics  showing  the  effect  of  a  shrinking  volume  of 
money  on  the  prices  of  agricultural  products,  and  advocating  the 
full  restoration  of  silver. 

Most  of  the  Senators  from  the  South   spoke  on  the  side  of  free 
coinage.     Many   of    the  speeches   showed   wide   investigation   and 
correct   knowledge   of  monetary  principles.  The  following  is  from 
the  speech  of  Mr.  Daniel,  of  Virginia,  delivered  May  22d : 
No  Danger  of  Too  Much  Money. 

Mr.  President,  let  us  ask  ourselves  this  question,  are  we  going  to  have  too  much 
money  in  America  by  reason  of  the  free  coinage  of  silver?  I  have  already  shown 
from  the  report  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  that  it  can  not  exceed  the  amount 
of  about  a  dollar  a  head  per  year  for  the  whole  American  population.  The  fact  must 
be  conceded  that  with  the  increasing  volume  of  money  prices  will  rise. 

When  prices  are  increasing  money  is  seldom  hoarded,  because  there  is  every 
temptation  to  its  free  use.  Money  is  generally  hoarded  when  prices  are  declining, 
because  the  money- holder  says  to  himself, "  If  I  wait  I  can  buy  cheaper."  On  the 
contrary,  he  rushes  to  invest  when  prices  are  rising,  because  he  says  to  himself, 
"  If  I  buy  to-day  I  can  sell  for  more  to-morrow."  Now  it  is  acknowledged  that 
as  soon  as  silver  is  admitted  to  free  coinage  there  will  be  a  tendency  of  prices  up- 
ward. 

Anticipation  of  More  Money  Stimulates  Prices. 

The  very  anticipation  of  free  silver  coinage  has  given  a  rise  to  stocks  and  prices 
in  New  York  and  an  upward  tendency  everywhere.  And,  therefore,  as  prices 
will  rise  with  free  coinage  it  is  natural  and  logical  to  assume  that  money  will  not 
be  hoarded  as  long  as  that  tendency  exists. 

Gold  AVill  Not  Leave  While  Investments  Here  Tempt  It.  v 

Unless  by  the  operation  of  other  causes,  gold  is  not  likely  to  leave  this  country 
when  silver  is  admitted  to  free  coinage.  Nor  will  it  ever  leave  this  country  until  it 
finds  a  better  field  of  investment  elsewhere  than  it  can  find  here.  As  long  as  this 
country  has  lands,  minerals,  stocks  and  bonds,  and  other  properties  inviting  invest- 
ment at  better  rates  than  are  off'ered  elsewhere,  money  will  have  no  tendency  to  quit 
our  shores  for  foreign  parts.  Investors  are  not  turned  away  from  buying  our  stocks 


113 

and  bonds  by  the  anticipation  of  more  money  through  free  silver  coinage.    They 
look  to  the  maintenance  of  prices  here,  and  hence  they  seek  our  shores. 

Gold  Not  Likely  To  Go  To  a  Premium. 
Nor  is  the  gold  dollar  likely  to  go  to  a  prf  miiim  over  the  silver  dolls r.  What 
condition  will  exist  to  drive  it  to  a  premium?  What  use  will  there  be  for  a  gold 
dollar  making  it  desirable  that  a  man  shall  part  with  more  than  one  silver  dollar 
in  order  to  get  a  gold  dollar?  He  can  pay  as  much  tax  with  h's  silver  dollar  as 
with  a  gold  dollar.  He  can  discharge  as  nruch  debt  with  his  silver  dollar  aa  with 
a  gold  dollar.  He  can  buy  as  much  of  any  commodi'y  with  his  silver  dollar  as 
with  a  gold  dollar  ;  and  why  then  shall  he  give  more  than  a  silver  dollar  in  order 
to  g«t  a  gold  dollar  ?  After  he  has  gotten  it  it  would  render  him  no  greater  service. 

The  following  is  from  a  speech  by  Mr.  Harris,  of  Tennessee,  in 

•which  the  true  theory  of  money  is  well  stated  : 

Upon  the  financial  question  there  are  certain  axiomatic  facts  which  should  con- 
trol the  ac'ion  of  the  legislator. 

First.  That  mone>  is  tue  medium  of  t-xchanga  of  commodities  in  all  civilized 
-countries  and  between  all  countries. 

Secondly.  The  amount  of  money  circulating  in  the  country  fixes  the  price  of 
all  propel ty  and  labor  which  are  exchanged  for  money  ;  and 

Thirdly.  That  the  law  of  demand  and  supply  appliet^  as  well  to  money  as  to  all 
other  things  of  value,  so  that  when  the  demand  for  money  exceeds  the  supply, 
like  everything  else  its  market  price  is  increased  in  the  ratio  of  the  excess  of  de- 
mand over  the  supply. 

Or,  to  state  the  proposition  in  a  different  form  of  words,  diminish  the  amount  or 
volume  of  money  in  the  country,  and  the  reduced  volume  will  have  the  same  pur- 
chasing power,  and  will  buy  as  much  land,  labor,  and  the  pr-ducts  of  labor  as  the 
larger  volume  would  have  bought  before  the  amount  was  reduced. 

To  illustrate: 

If  the  amount  of  money  in  this  country  to-day  shouM  be  reduced  to  one-half  of 
that  amount  to-morrow,  as  soon  as  the  business  of  the  country  could  adjust  itself 
to  the  nevF  condition  each  dollar  of  this  reduced  volume  would  buy  twice  as  much 
labor,  twice  as  much  property  as  it  could  have  bought  bffore  the  volume  was  so 
leduced,  n'>t  because  the  utility  or  real  value  of  either  land,  labor,  or  the  products 
of  labor  had  depreciated,  but  because  money  had  in'Tcased  in  price  by  reason  of 
the  fact  that  the  demand  for  money  was  so  far  in  excess  of  the  supply. 

Upon  this  question  there  is  a  sharp  aud  well  defioed  conflict  between  the  inter- 
ests of  capi  al  and  labor,  creditor  and  debtor  classes. 

The  capitalist,  whose  wealtti  consists  of  money,  bonds,  and  mortgages,  is  directly 
interested  in  reducing  the  amount  of  money  in  the  country,  because  it  increases 
the  purchasing  power,  in  the  ratio  of  such  redu'^tion.  of  his  capital,  which  is  fixed 
in  amount  by  ihe  securities  he  holds  ;  and  whether  the."e  is  much  or  little  money 
in  the  country,  he  demands  and  receives  his  stipulated  number  of  dollars. 

The  debtor  has  contracted  to  pay  dollars,  and  he  must  pay  dollars  without  re- 
gard to  the  amount  of  labor  or  property  it  takes  to  obtain  them ;  the  debt-paying 
power  of  moDey  not  being  increased,  however  much  the  volume  may  have  been 
reduced. 

But  the  interest  of  the  laborer,  the  producer,  and  the  debtor  demand  an  in- 
creased and  constantly  increasing  volume  fif  money,  because  in  the  ratio  of  such 
increase  the  wages  of  labor  and  the  price  of  property  will  advance. 

If  there  were  no  debts,  no  outstanding  obligations,  it  would  not  matter  whether 
the  volume  of  money  in  the  country  was  large  or  small,  as  the  businees  of  the  coun- 
try would  a<1ju8t  itself  to  that  volume  whatever  it  might  be. 

Then,  if  tne  legislator  would  avoid  flactuaions  hurtful  to  one  or  the  other  of 
these  cojaflictirg  interests  of  creditors  and  debtors,  and  maintain  existing  relations 
betweeen  money  and  property,  capital  and  labor,  the  volu  ne  of  money  in  circula- 
tion should  increase  in  the  ratio  of  increase  of  population  and  business  of  the 
country. 

The  quotations  above  given  fall  far  short  of  doing  justice  to  the  de- 
bate in  the  Senate,  but  want  of  space  prevents  the  extension  of  these 
extracts. 


CHAPTER  IX. 


The  Senate  Free  Coinage  Bill  in  the  House. 

The  free  coinage  bill,  which  passed  the  Senate  as  a  substitute 
for  the  House  bill  (5381),  went  to  the  House  June  18,  and  was  re- 
ferred by  the  Speaker,  without  the  order  of  the  House,  to  the  Com- 
mittee on  Coinage,  Weights  and  Measures.  This  reference  was 
called  in  question  when  the  House  met  on  the  19th,  by  Mr.  Mills,  of 
Texas,  who  objected  to  the  approval  of  the  Journal  which  containei 
the  reference  of  the  bill. 

The  following  is  the  record  on  the  question  of  the  approval  of  the 
Journal,  which  carried  the  Senate  bill  to  the  Committee  on  Coinage , 
Weights  and  Measures,  thereby  preventing  a  direct  vote  on  free 
coinage  in  the  House : 

Thursday,  June  19, 1890.    The  House  met  at  12  o'clock  m. 

The  Journal. 

The  Journal  of  the  proceedings  of  yesterday  was  read. 

The  SPEAKER.  If  there  be  no  objection,  the  Journal  as  read  will  be  ap- 
proved. 

Mr.  MILLS.    I  object  to  the  approval  of  the  Journal. 

Mr.  BRECKINRID3E,  of  Kentucky.  Let  the  entire  Journal  be  read.  I  think 
the  reference  of  bills  has  not  been  read,  as  well  as  other  matters  which  properly 
belong  to  the  Journal. 

The  SPEAKER     It  has  not  been.    Only  the  usual  portions  have  been  read. 

Mr.  McKINLEY.  I  move  that  the  Journal  be  approved,  and  upon  that  I  de- 
mand the  previous  question. 

Mr.  MILLS.    I  move  to  correct  the  Journal  as  follows 

Mr.  BRECKINRIDGE,  of  Kentucky.  I  rise  to  a  question  of  order.  The  motion 
of  the  gentleman  from  Ohio  is  not  in  order  until  the  Journal  has  been  read 
through.    The  Clerk  has  not  read  the  entire  Journal. 

The  SPEAKER.    The  Journal  has  not  been  read  in  full. 

Mr.  McKINLEY.  I  supposed  the  Clerk  had  concluded  the  reading  of  the 
Journal. 

The  SPEAKER.  The  Clerk  will  read  the  remain  ler  of  the  Journal.  Any 
member  has  a  right  to  demand  the  reading  of  the  Journal  in  full. 

Mr.  MILLS.  I  move  to  correct  the  Journal  in  the  following  particulars,  Mr.. 
Speaker 

The  SPEAKER.  The  Clerk  will  read  the  Journal.  The  Clerk  had  only  com- 
pleted the  reading  of  those  portions  of  the  Journal  which  are  usually  read. 

House  Bill  With  Senate  Amendments  Referred. 

Under  clause  2  of  Rule  XXIV,  a  House  bill  of  the  following  title  with  Senate 
amendments  was  taken  from  the  Speaker's  table  and  referred  as  follows: 

"A  bill  (H.  R  5381)  directing  the  purchase  of  silver  bullion  and  the  issue  of 
Treasury  notes  thereon,  and  for  other  purposes — to  the  Committee  on  Coinage, 
"Weights  and  Measures." 

Mr.  McKINLEY.  Now,  Mr.  Speaker,  I  move  the  approval  of  the! Journal,  and 
on  that  I  demand  the  previous  question. 

Mr.  MILLS.    I  have  the  floor  to  move  a  correction  of  the  Journal. 

The  SPEAKER.    The  gentleman  from  Ohio  submits  amotion  which  is  in  order. 

Mr.  MILLS.  I  have  the  floor  and  the  gentleman  from  Ohio  can  not  take  pos- 
session of  it  without  my  consent  to  make  his  motion. 


115 


The  SPEAKER.  The  Clerk  informs  the  Chair  that  the  entire  Journal  has  not 
yet  been  read. 

The  Clerk  resumed  and  concluded  the  reading  of  the  Journal  relating  to  the  ref- 
erence of  bills,  petitions,  etc.,  under  the  rule. 

The  SPEAKER.    The  gentleman  from  Ohio 

Mr.  McKINLEY.  I  move  that  the  Journal  of  the  proceedings  of  yesterday  be 
approved,  and  upon  that  I  demand  the  previous  question. 

■  Mr.  MILLS.    The  gentleman  from  Ohio  certainly  does  not  want  to  prevent  a 
correction  of  the  Journal. 

The  SPEAKER.     The  gentleman  from  Ohio  demands  the  previous  question. 

Mr.  MILLS.    The  scent  of  the  gentleman  is  keen  ;  he  smells  the  battle  afar  off. 

On  the  demand  for  the  previous  question  I  ask  the  yeas  and  nays. 

Mr.  SPRINGER.  I  rise  to  a  question  of  order.  I  make  the  point  of  order  that 
a  portion  of  the  Rscord  just  read  by  the  Clerk  forms  no  part  of  the  Journal  of  the 
House ;  and  can  not  be  a  part  of  the  Journal  of  the  House.  I  make  the  point  that 
the  Clerk  has  read,  as  of  the  Journal  of  the  House,  a  fcict  which  can  not  properly 
go  into  the  proceedings  of  this  House,  because  it  did  not  take  place  in  the  House, 
to  wit,  the  fact  that  certain  Senate  bills  were  referred  to  committees,  particularly 
the  amendments  of  the  Senate  to  the  House  bill  5381 

The  SPEAKER.    That  is  a  question  for  the  House  to  determine. 

The  question  is  on  the  demand  of  the  gentleman  from  Texas  for  the  yeas  and  nays. 

The  yeas  and  nays  were  oidered, 

Mr.  SPRINGER.  Does  the  Speaker  deny  the  right  of  a  Representative  on  this 
floor  to  Fubmit  a  question  of  order  ? 

The  SPEAKER.    The  Clerk  will  call  the  roll. 

The  Clerk  proceeded  to  call  the  roll. 

Mr,  SPRIN  GER.  Does  the  Speaker  deny  my  right  to  raise  the  question  of  order  ? 
You  may  ignore  it,  and  put  down  the  Representatives  of  the  people  on  this  floor  ; 
but  the  people  will  put  you  down,  sir,  at  the  polls  in  November  [applause  and 
cheers  on  the  Democratic  side],  and  your  party  with  you. 

The  question  was  taken  ;  and  there  were — yeas  105,  nays  117,  not 

voting  105  ;  as  follows: 


YEAS— 105. 

Adam?, 

Candler,  Mass. 

Gifibrd, 

Morrill, 

Stephenson, 

Allen,  Mich. 

Cannon, 

Greenhalge, 

Mors^, 

Stewart,  Vt. 

AndersoUjKans 

,  Caswell, 

Hall, 

O'Donnell, 

Stivers, 

Arnold, 

Cheadie, 

Hansbrough, 

O'Neill,  Pa. 

Stock  bridge. 

Atkinson,W.Va 

.  Cogswell, 

Harmer, 

Ooborne, 

Struble, 

Baker, 

Comstock, 

Haugen, 

Payson, 

Sweney, 

Bank?, 

Conger, 

Henderson,  111. 

Pickler, 

Taylor,  E.  B. 

Beck  with, 

Culbertson,  Pa. 

Hill, 

Post, 

Taylor,  J.  D. 

Belden, 

Cutcheon, 

Hitt, 

Pugsley, 

Thomas, 

Belknap, 

De  Lano, 

Kin«ey, 

Reed,  Iowa, 

Thompson, 

Bingham, 

DoUiver. 

Knapp, 

Reyburn, 

Vandever, 

Bliss, 

Bunnell, 

Lacey, 

Rife, 

Van  Schaick, 

Boothman, 

Evans, 

Laidlaw, 

Rowell, 

Waddill, 

Bou  telle. 

Farquhar, 

Laws, 

Russell, 

Walker,  Mass. 

Brewer, 

Finley, 

Lodge, 

Sawyer, 

Wallace,  Mass. 

Brosiug, 

Flick, 

McCormick, 

Sherman, 

Wallace,  N.  Y. 

Brower, 

Flood, 

McKenna, 

Simon  ds. 

Watson, 

Buchanan,  N.  J. 

,  Frank, 

McKinley, 

Smith,  W.  Va. 

Wickham, 

Burrows, 

Funston, 

Miles, 

Smyser, 

Williams,  Ohio 

Burfon, 

Gear, 

Moffitt, 

Snider, 

Wright, 

Butter  worth, 

Gest, 

Moore,  N.  H. 

NAYS-117. 

Spooner, 

Yardley. 

Alderson, 

Clarke,  Ala. 

Grimes, 

McClellan, 

Spinola, 

Anderson,  Miss. 

Clements, 

Hare, 

McCreary, 

Springer,  Ga. 

Bankhead, 

Cobb, 

Hayes, 

McMillan, 

Stewart,  Tex. 

Barnes, 

Cooper,  Ind. 

Haynes, 

McRae, 

Stockdale, 

116 


Bartine, 

Bland, 

Blount, 

Breckinridge,  Ark, 

Breckinridge,  Ky. 

Brick  ner, 

Brookshire, 

Brown,  J.  B. 

Brunner, 

Buclianan,  Va. 

Buf'kalew, 

Bollock, 

Bynutn, 

Campbell, 

Candler,  Ga. 

Carlton, 

Carter, 

Caruth, 

Ca'chings, 

Chipman, 


Cowles, 

Grain, 

Crisp, 

Cu]berson,Te2. 

Cummings, 

Davidson, 

DeHaven, 

Dockery, 

Dunphy, 

Edmunda, 

Elliott, 

Ellis, 

Enloe, 

Fitch, 

Fithian, 

Form:in, 

Forney, 

Fowler, 

Geissenhainer, 

Goodnight, 


Heard, 

Hemphill, 

Henderson,N 

Herbert, 

Hnlman, 

Kelley, 

Kerr,  Iowa, 

Kerr,  Pa. 

Ki'gore, 

Lane, 

Lnnham, 

Lee, 

Lester,  Ga. 

Lewis,     . 

Lind, 

Maish, 

Mansur, 

Martin,  Ind. 

McAdoo, 

McClammy, 


Mills, 

Montgomery, 
,C.Mf)ore,  Tex. 
Morrow, 
Mutchler, 
Norton, 
O'Neall,  Ind. 
O'Neil,  Maes. 
Owens,  Mass. 
Parrett, 
Paynter, 
Peel, 

Penington, 
Perry, 
Quinn, 
Reilly, 
Richardson, 
Robertson, 
Sayers, 
Shively, 


Stone,  Ky. 
Stone,  Mo. 
Tarsney, 
Tillman, 
TowEsend,  Col. 
Tracey, 
Turner,  Ga. 
Turner,  N.  Y. 
Vaux, 

Wheeler,  Ala. 
Whiting, 
Whitthorne, 
Wilkinson, 
Williams,  111. 
Wilson,  Mo. 
Wilson,  W.  Va. 


Those  not  voting  and  pairs  are  omitted. 

The  SPEAKER.  Oa  this  question  the  yeas  are  105,  and  the  nays  are  117;  and 
the  House  refuses  to  order  the  previous  question.  [Applause  on  the  Democratic 
Bide.] 

Mr.  MILLS.  Mr.  Speaker,  I  offer  the  following  resolution,  to  correct  the  Jour- 
nal. 

The  SPEAKER.  The  gentleman  from  Texas  offers  the  following  resolution  for 
the  correction  of  the  Journal,  which  the  Clerk  will  read  : 

The  Clerk  read  as  follows : 

Whereas  the  order  of  reference  made  by  the  Speaker  referring  House  bill  5381 
which  » as  returned  to  the  House  yesterday  with  a  Senate  amendment,  to  the 
Committee  on  Coinage,  Weights  and  Measures,  was  incorrect  under  the  rules  of 
tiie  House  and  without  authority  under  said  rules :  Therefore, 

Bfsolved,  That  the  Journal  of  yesterday,  Wednesday,  June  18,',be  corrected  by 
striking  therefrom  this  entry,  to  wit: 

"  Under  clause  2  of  Rule  XXIV,  a  House  bill  of  the  followiug  title  with  Senate 
amendments  was  taken  from  the  Speaker's  table  and  referred  as  follows  : 

"A  bill  (H.  R.  5381)  directing  the  purchase  of  silver  bullion  and  the  issue  of 
Treaeury  notes  thereon,  and  for  other  purposes — to  the  Committee  on  Coinage, 
Weights  and  Measures." 

Mr.  MILLS.     Mr.  Speaker 

Mr.  C  VNNON.     Mr.  Speaker,  to  that  I  raise  a  pointof  order. 

Mr.  MILLS.     Mr.  Speaker 

The  SPE  ^  KER.     For  what  purpose  does  the  gentleman  from  Illinois  rise? 

Mr.  CANNON.    To  that  resolution  I  make  the  point  of  order 

The  SPEAKER.  The  gentleman  from  Illinois  has  the  right  to  make'a  point  of 
order. 

Mr.  CANNON.    I  supposed  so. 

The  SPEAKER.    The  gentleman  will  state  his  point  of  order. 

Mr.  CANNON.  My  point  of  order  is  that  the  resolution  is  not  in  order  for  the 
following  reasons :  First,  it  proposes  to  strike  out  an  entry  in  the  Journal  that 
records  a  matter  of  fact.  Second,  it  is  not  in  order  for  the  reason,  under  the  rule, 
that  if  adopted  it  would  have  the  eflfect,  if  it  has  any  effect  at  all,  to  change  a  refer- 
ence of  a  bill  with  a  Senate  amendment  otherwise  than  as  provided  by  the  rules. 
Rule  XXIV,  clause  2,  is  as  follows  : 

2.  BuBiness  on  the  Speaker's  table  shall  be  disposed  of  as  follows: 

Messages  from  the  President  shall  be  referred  to  the  appropriate  committees 
with(  ut  debate.  Reports  and  communications  from  the  heads  of  Departments, 
and  other  communications  addressed  to  the  House,  and  billp,  resolutions,  and 
messages  from  the  Senate  may  be  referred  to  the  appropriate  committees  in  the 
same  manner,  and  with  the  same  right  of  correction  as  public  bills  presented  bj 


in 


members;  but  House  bills  with  Sanate  amendments  which  do  not  require  con- 
sideration in  a  Committee  of  the  Whole,  may  be  at  once  disposed  of  as  the  House 
may  determine,  as  may  also  Senate  bills  substantially  the  same  as  House  bills 
already  favorably  reported.by  a  committee  of  the  House,  and  not  required  to  be 
considered  in  Committee  of  the  Whole,  may  also  be  disposed  of  in  the  same  man- 
ner on  motion  directed  to  be  made  by  such  ijommittee. 

A  long  discussion  followed,  participated  in  in  favor  of  the  motion 
to  approve  the  Journal,  by  Messrs.  Cannon,  Butterworth,  Peters, 
Burrows,  and  others  ;  and  against  the  reference  by  Messrs.  Mills, 
Breckinridge,  Williams,  Blount,  Anderson  of  Kansas,  Bland,  and 
others.  The  Speaker  also  made  a  statement  explaining  his  refer- 
ence of  the  bill  to  the  Coinage  Committee.  Mr,  Mills  moved  the 
previous  question  on  his  resolution.  Mr.  Cannon  moved  to  lay  this 
resolution  on  the  table. 

The  yeas  and  nays  were  ordered. 

The  question  was  taken  ;  and  there  were — yeas  118,  nays  123,  not 
voting  86,  as  follows  : 

YEAS— 118. 


Adam?, 

Cheadle, 

Henderson,  111. 

O'Donnell, 

Stephenson, 

Allen,  Mich. 

Cogswell, 

Hill, 

O'Neill,  Pa. 

Slew  art,  Vt. 

Anderson.  Kans. 

Comstock, 

Hitt, 

Osborne, 

Stivf^rs, 

Arnold, 

Conger, 

Kerr,  Iowa, 

Owen,Ind. 

Stockbridge, 

Atkinson,  W,  Va. 

Culbertson,  Pa 

.  Ketcham, 

Payson, 

Sfcruble, 

Baker, 

Cutcheon, 

Kinsey, 

Pickler, 

Sweney, 

Banks, 

Dalzpll, 

Kjiapp, 

Post, 

Taylor,  E,  B. 

Beckwith, 

Dargan, 

Lacey, 

Pugsley, 

Taylor,  J.  D. 

Belden, 

De  ]-.ano, 

La  Follette, 

Raines, 

Thomas, 

Belknap, 

Dolliver, 

Laidlaw, 

Randall, 

Thompson, 

Bingham, 

Bunnell, 

Laws, 

Reed,  Iowa, 

Turner,  Kans. 

Bliss, 

Evans, 

Lind, 

Reyburn, 

Vandever, 

Boothman, 

Farquhar, 

Lodge, 

Rife, 

Van  Schaick, 

Boutelle, 

Finlev, 

McCormick, 

Rockwell, 

Waddill, 

Brewer, 

Flick." 

McKeana, 

Rowell, 

Walker,  Mass. 

Brosius, 

Flood, 

McKinley, 

Russell, 

Wallace,  Mass. 

B  rower, 

Frank, 

Miles, 

Sanford, 

Wallace,  N.  Y. 

Buchanan,  N.  J. 

Funston, 

Milliken, 

Sawyer, 

Wickham, 

Burrows, 

Gear, 

Moffitt, 

Sherman, 

Williams,  Ohio, 

Burton, 

Gifford, 

Moore,  N.  H. 

Simonds, 

Wilson,  Ky. 

Butterworth, 

Greenhalge, 

Morrill, 

Smith,  W.  Va. 

Wright, 

Candler,  Mass. 

Hall, 

Morse, 

Smyser, 

Yardley. 

Cannon, 

Hansbrough, 

Mudd, 

Snider, 

Caswell, 

Haugen, 

Niedringhaus, 
NAYS— 123. 

Spooner, 

Abbott, 

Caruth, 

Geissenhainer, 

McCreary, 

Skinner, 

Alderson, 

Catchings, 

Goodnight, 

McMillin, 

Spinola, 

Anderson,  Miss. 

Chipman, 

Grimes, 

McRae, 

Springer, 

Bankhead, 

Clarke,  Ala. 

Hare, 

Mills, 

Stewart,  Ga. 

Barnes, 

Clements, 

Hayes, 

Montgomery, 

Stewart,  Tex. 

Bartiae, 

Ciunie, 

Haynes, 

Moore,  Tex. 

Stockdale, 

Bigg.?, 

Cobb, 

Heard, 

Morrow, 

Stone,  Mo. 

Blanchard, 

Cooper,  Tnd. 

Hemphill, 

Mutchler, 

Stump, 

Bland, 

Cothran, 

Hender8on,N.C.Norton, 

Tarsney, 

Blount, 

Cowles, 

Herbert, 

Gates, 

Tillman, 

Boatner, 

Crisp, 

Holman, 

O'Neall,  Ind. 

Townsend,  Col. 

118 


Breckinridge,  Ark.  Culberson,Tex.  Kelley, 


Breckinridge,  Ky.  Cummings, 
Brickner,  Davidson, 


Brooksliire, 

De  Haven, 

Brown,  J.  B. 

Dockery, 

Brunner, 

Dunphy, 

Bachanan,  Va. 

Edmunds, 

Backalew, 

Elliott, 

Bullock, 

Ellis, 

Bynum, 

Enloe, 

Campbell, 

■  Ewart, 

Candler,  Ga. 

Fithian, 

Carlton, 

Forman, 

Carter, 

Fowler, 

Kerr,  Pa. 

Kilgore, 

Lane, 

LanLam, 

Lester,  Ga. 

Lewis, 

Magner, 

Maish, 

Mansur, 

Martin,  Ind. 

McAdoo, 

McClammy, 

McClellan, 


O'Neil,  Mass. 

Owens,  Ohio, 

Barrett, 

Paynter, 

Peel, 

Penington, 

Perry, 

Quinn, 

Reilly, 

Richardson, 

Robertson, 

Sayers, 

Seney, 

Shively, 


Tucker, 
Turner,  Ga. 
Turner,  N.  Y. 
Vaux, 

Wheeler,  Ala. 
Whiting, 
Whitthorne, 
Wilkinson, 
Willcox, 
Williams,  III. 
Wilson,  Mo. 
Wilson,  W.  Va. 


So  the  motion  was  rejected. 

The  motion  to  lay  on  the  table  having  been  lost,  the  question  re- 
curred upon  the  motion  of  Mr.  Mills,  for  the  previous  question.  The 
previous  question  was  ordered. 

The  question  then  recurred  on  Mr.  Mills'  resolution  to  amend  the 
Journal  so  as  to  bring  the  bill  directly  before  the  House.  The  yeas 
and  nays  were  ordered. 

The  question  was  taken  ;  and  it  was  decided  in  the  affirmative — 
yeas  121,  nays  117,  as  follows: 


Abbott, 

Alderson, 

Anderson,  Miss. 

Bankhead, 

Barnes, 

Bartine, 


Bland, 

Blount, 

Boatner, 

Breckinridge,  Ark, 

Breckinridge,  Ky. 

Brickner, 

Brookehire, 

Brown,  J.  B. 

Brunner, 

Buchanan,  Va. 

Buckalew, 

Bullock, 

Bynum, 

Candler,  Ga. 

Carlton, 

Carter, 

Caruth, 

Catchingp, 


Adams, 
Allen,  Mich. 
Anderson,  Kans. 
Arnold, 


Clarke,  Ala. 

Clements, 

Clunie, 

Cobb, 

Cooper,  Ind. 

Cothran, 

Cowles, 

Crisp, 

Culberson,  Tex. 

Cummings, 

Davidson, 

De  Haven, 

Dockery, 

Dnnphy, 

Edmunds, 

Elliolt, 

Ellis, 

Ealoe, 

Fitch, 

Fithian, 

Forman, 

Fowler, 

Geissenhainer, 

Goodnight, 

Grimes, 


Cheadle, 
Cogswell, 
Comstock, 
Conger, 


YEAS— 12L 

Hare, 

Hayes, 

Haynes, 

Heard, 

Plemphill, 

Henderson,N, 

Herbert, 

Holman, 

Kelley, 

Kerr,  Pa.    • 

Kilgore, 

Lane, 

Lanham, 

Lester,  Ga. 

Lewis, 

Magner, 

Maish, 

Mansur, 

Martin,  Ind. 

McAdoo, 

McClammy, 

McClellan, 

McCreary, 

McKinlev, 

McMillin^ 

NAYS— 117. 

Hill, 
Hitt, 

Kerr,  Iowa. 
Ketcham, 


McRae, 

Mills, 

Montgomery, 
Moore,  Tex. 
Morrow, 
C.Mutchler, 
Norton, 
Gates, 

O'Neall,  Ind. 
O'Neil,  Mass. 
Owens,  Ohio, 
Parrett, 
Paynter, 
Peel, 

Penington, 
Perrv, 
Reilly, 
Richardson, 
Robertson, 
Sayerp, 
Seney, 
Shively, 
Skinner, 
Spinola, 
Springer, 


Osbcrne, 
Owen,  Ind. 
Payeon, 
Pickler, 


Stewart,  Ga. 
Stewart,  Tex. 
Stockdale, 
Stone,  Mo. 
Stump, 
Tarsney, 
Tillman, 
Townsend,  Col. 
Tucker, 
Turner,  Ga. 
Turner,  N.  Y. 
Vaux, 

Wheeler,  Ala. 
Whiting, 
Whitthorne, 
Wiley, 
Wilkinson, 
Willcox, 
Williams,  111. 
Wilson,  Mo. 
Wilson,  W.  Va. 


Stivers, 
Stockbridge, 
Struble, 
Sweney, 


119 


ckiDson,  W.  Va.  Culbertson,  Pa.  Kinsey, 


Baker, 

Banks, 

Beckwith, 

Belden, 

Belknap, 

Bingham, 

Biiss, 

Booth  man, 

Boutelle, 

Brewer, 

Brosius, 

Brewer, 

Bachanan,  N.  J. 

Burrows, 

Burton, 

Butter  worth, 

Oandler,  Mass. 

■Cannon, 

CJaawell, 


Cutcheon, 

Ddlzell, 

De  Lano, 

DoUiver, 

Dunnell, 

Evans, 

Farquhar, 

Finley, 

Flick, 

Flood, 

Frank, 

Funston, 

Gear, 

Gi  fiord, 

Greenhalge, 

Hall, 

Hansbrough, 

Haugen, 


Knapp, 

Lacey, 

La  Follette, 

Laidlaw, 

Laws, 

Lind, 

Lodge, 

McCormick, 

McKenna, 

Miles, 

Millikin, 

Moffitt, 

Moore,  N.  H. 

Morril), 

Moree, 

Mudd. 


Poet, 

Pugsley, 

Raines, 

Randall, 

R*^ed,  Iowa, 

Reyburn, 

Rife, 

Rockwell, 

Rowell, 

Russell, 

Sanford, 

Sawyer, 

Sherman, 

Simonds, 


Taylor,  E.  B. 
Taylor,  J.  D. 
Thomas, 
Thompson, 
Tracey, 
Turner,  Kans. 
Vandever, 
Van  Schaick, 
Waddill, 
Walker,  Mass. 
Wallace,  Mass, 
Wallace,  N.Y. 
Wickham, 
Williams,  Ohio. 


Smith,  W.  Va,   Wilson,  Ky 


Smyser, 
Snider 


Niedringhaus,    Spooner, 
O'Donnell,         Stephenson, 
' Stewart,  Vt. 


Wright, 
Yardley. 


Henderson,  111.  O'Neill,  Pa. 

So  the  resolution  was  adopted. 

Mr.  Funston,  of  Kansas,  changed  his  vote  from  ''aye"  to 
^'  nay."  Mr.  McKinley  having  changed  his  vote  moved  to  recon- 
sider the  vote  by  which  the  resolution  was  adopted.  Mr.  Mills 
moved  to  lay  that  motion  on  the  table.  Pending  that,  Mr.  McKin- 
ley moved  that  the  House  adjourn.  The  yeas  and  nays  were  ordered 
on  Mr.  McKinley 's  motion  to  adjourn,  and  ii  was  decided  in  the  nega- 
tive— yeas  119,  nays  120,  not  voting  88. 

The  question  then  recurred  upon  Mr.  Mills'  motion  to  lay  on  the 
table  Mr.  McKinley's  motion  to  reconsider  the  vote  by  which  Mr. 
Mills'  resolution  was  adopted.  The  yeas  and  nays  were  ordered, 
the  result  being — yeas  121,  nays  114. 

Mr.  Mills  then  moved  the  approval  of  the  Journal  as  amended.  The 
Speaker  held  that  the  preamble  must  first  be  disposed  of.  The  pre- 
amble is  as  follows : 

Whereas  the  order  of  reference  made  by  the  Speaker  referring  House  bill 
5881,  which  was  returned  to  the  House  yesterday  with  a  Senate  amendment,  to 
the  Committee  on  Coinage,  Weights  and  Measures,  was  incorrect  under  the  rules 
of  the  House  and  done  without  authority  under  said  rules 


On  this  question  the  yeas  were  109  and  the  nays  121. 
the  House  adjourned. 

When  the  House  met  June  20th — 


Thereupon 


The  SPE  \.KER  said :  The  question  before  the  House  is  the  motion  of  the 
^ntleman  from  Texas  [Mr.  Mills]  for  the  previous  question  upon  the  motion 
4o  approve  the  Journal  of  the  proceedings  of  Wednesday  last. 

Mr.  MILLS.    It  was  my  motion  to  approve  the  Journal  as  amended. 

Mr.  McKINLEY.    We  both  made  the  motion  to  approve  the  Journal. 

Mr.  MILLS.    But  I  made  the  motion  to  approve  the  Journal  as  amended. 

The  SPEAKER.    There  is  no  question  about  that  whatever. 


120 


The  question  was  taken  ;  and  there  were- 

foUows  : 

YEAS— 126. 


-yeas  126,  nays  122,  as- 


Abbotc, 

Alderson, 

Anderson,  Miss. 

Bankhead, 

Barnes, 

Bartine, 

Biggs, 

Blanchard, 

Bland, 

Blount, 

Boatner, 

Breckinridge,  Ark 

Breckinridge,  Ky. 

Brickner, 

Brookshire, 

Brown,  J.  B. 

Brunner, 

Buchanan,  Va. 

Bullock, 

Bunn, 

Bynum, 

Campbell, 

Carlton, 

Carter, 

Caruth, 

Chipman, 


Clements, 

Clunie, 

Cobb, 

Cothran, 

Cowries, 

Grain, 

Crisp, 

Culberson,Tex. 

Cummings, 

Dargaa, 

Davidson, 

.Dri  Haven, 

Dockery, 

Dunphy, 

Elliott, 

Ellis, 

Enloe, 

Fitch, 

Fithian, 

Forman, 

Forney, 

Fowler, 

Geissenhainer, 

Gibson, 

Goodnight, 

Grimes, 


Adams, 

Allen,  Mich. 

Anderson,  Kans. 

Arnold, 

Atkinson,  W.  Va. 

Baker, 

Banks, 

Beckwith, 

Belden, 

Belknap, 

Bergen, 

Bingham, 

Bliss, 

Boothman, 

Boutelle, 

Bowden, 

Brewer, 

Brosiug, 

Brower, 

Browne,  Va. 

Buchanan,  N.  J. 

Barrows, 

Burton, 

Batterworth, 

Candler,  Mass. 


Cannon, 

Caswell, 

Cheadle, 

Cogswell, 

Comstock, 

Cong-^r, 

Culberteon,  Pa. 

Cutcheon, 

Dalzell, 

De  Lano, 

DoUiver, 

Bunnell, 

Evans, 

Farquhar, 

Finley, 

Flood, 

Frank, 

Funston, 

Gear, 

Gest, 

Glfford, 

Greenhalge, 

Grosvenor, 

Hall, 

Hansbrough, 


Hare, 

Hayes, 

Haynes, 

Heard, 

Hemphill, 

H«Dder8on,N 

Herbert, 

Hermann, 

Holman, 

Kelley, 

Kilgjre, 

Lane, 

Lanham, 

Lee, 

Lester,  Ga. 

Lester,  Va. 

Lewis, 

Magner, 

Maish, 

Mansur, 

Martin,  Ind. 

McAdoo, 

McClammy, 

McClellan, 

Mc('reary, 

McKinley, 

NAYS— 122. 

Harmer, 

Haugen, 

Henderson,  111. 

Henderson,  la. 

Hill, 

Hitt, 

Kennedy, 

Ketcham, 

Kinsey, 

Lacey, 

La  Follette, 

Laid  law. 

Laws, 

Lehlbach, 

Lind, 

Lodge, 

McComas, 

McCormick, 

McKenna, 

Miles, 

Milliken, 

Moffitt, 

Moore,  N.  H. 

Morrill, 

Morse, 


MeMillin, 
McRae, 
Mills, 

Montgomery, 
Moore,  Tex. 
C.Morrow, 
Norton, 
Gates, 

O'Neall,  Ind. 
O'Neil,  Mass. 
Parrett, 
Paynter, 
Peel, 

Penington, 
Perry, 
Quinn, 
Reilly. 
Richardson, 
Robertson, 
Rowland, 
Rick, 
Savers, 
Shively, 
Spinola, 
Springer, 
Stewart,  Ga. 


Mudd, 

Niedringhaus, 

0  Neil),  Pa. 

Osborne, 

Pay son, 

Perkins, 

Pickler, 

Post, 

Raines, 

Randall, 

Reed,  Iowa, 

Reyburn, 

Rife, 

Rockwell, 

Rowell, 

Russell, 

Sawyer, 

Scull, 

Sherman, 

Simonds, 

Smith,  111. 

Smith,  W. 

Smyser, 

Snider, 

Spooler, 


Stewart,  Tex. 

Stockdale, 

Stone,  Ky. 

Stump, 

Tarsney, 

Tillman, 

Townsend,  Col. 

Tucker, 

Turner,  Ga. 

Turner,  N.  Y. 

Vaux, 

Venable, 

Wheeler, 

Whiting, 

Whitthorne, 

Wike, 

Wilkinson, 

Willcox, 

Williams,  111. 

Wilson,  Mo. 

Wilson,  W.  Va. 

Yoder. 


Va. 


Stephenson,. 
Stewart,  Vt^ 
Stivers, 
StockbridgCj. 
Struble, 
Sweney, 
Taylor,  E.  B. 
Taylor,  J.  D. 
Thomas, 
Tracey, 
Turner,  Kans. 
Vandever, 
Van  Schaickr 
Waddill, 
Walker,  Mass. 
Wallace,  Mass. 
Wallace,  N.  Y. 
Wickham, 
Williams,  Ohio>., 
Wilson,  Ky. 
Wright, 
Yardley. 


So  the  previous  question  was  ordered. 

Mr.  McKinley  thereupon  moved  to  reconsider  the  vote  just  takea» 
The  following  colloquy  will  explain  the  vote  next  taken. 


121 

Mr.  McKINLEY.    I  move  to  reconsider  the  vote  just  taken. 

Mr.  BLAND.    I  make  the  point  of  order  that  that  is  a  dilatory  motion. 

Mr.  MIIjLS.    I  move  that  the  motion  to  reconsider  be  laid  upon  the  table. 

The  SPEAKER  proceeded  to  submit  the  question. 

Mr.  MILLS.     Let  u^  have  the  yeas  and  nays. 

Mr.  SPRINGER.  Yes ;  we  may  as  well  have  the  yeas  and  nays  at  once,  to  save 
time. 

The  yeas  and  nays  were  ordered. 

The  SPEAKER.  Thf  yeas  and  nays  are  ordered  on  the  motion  of  the  gentle- 
man from  Texas,  which  is  to  lay  upon  the  table  the  motion  of  the  gentleman  from 
Ohio  for  reconsideration  of  the  vote  last  taken,  and  the  Clerk  will  call  the  roll. 

The  question  was  taken  ;  and  there  were — yeas  131,  nays  129,  not  voting  67. 

So  the  motion  to  lay  on  the  table  was  agreed  to. 

The  SPEAKER.  The  previou'i  question  is  ordered  and  the  question  now  recurs- 
upon  the  approval  of  the  Journal  as  amended. 

Vote  to  Correct  the  Journal. 


Mr.  McKINLEY.    Upon  that  I  demand  the  yeas  and  nays. 

The  yeas  and  nays  were  ordered. 

The  question  was  taken  ;  and  there  were — yeas  132,  nays  130,  as  follows : 


Abbott, 

Alderson, 

Anderson,  Miss. 

Bankhead, 

Barnes, 

Bartine, 

Biggs, 

Blanchard, 

Bland, 

Blount, 

Boatner, 

Breckinridge,  Ark. 

Breckinridge,  Ky. 

Brick  ner, 

Brookehire, 

Brown,  J.  B. 

Brunner, 

Buchanan,  Va. 

Buckalew, 

Bullock, 

Bunn, 

Bynum, 

Campbell, 

Carlton, 

Carter, 

Caruth, 

Chipman, 


Adams, 
Allen,  Mich. 
Anderson,  Kans. 
Arnold, 

Atkinson,  W.  Va. 
Baker, 
Banks, 
Beckwith, 
Belden, 


Clarke,  Ala. 

Clements, 

Clunie, 

Cobb, 

Cooper,  Ind. 

Cothran, 

Cowles, 

Crain, 

Crisp, 

Culberson,Tex. 

Cummings, 

Dargan, 

Davidson, 

De  Haven, 

Dockery, 

Dunphy, 

Edmunds, 

Elliott, 

Ellis, 

Enloe, 

Fitch, 

Fithian, 

Forman, 

Forney, 

Fowler, 

Geissenhainer, 

Gibson, 


Caswell, 

Cheadle, 

Cogswell, 

Comstock, 

Conger, 

Culbertson,  Pa. 

Cutcbeon, 

Dalzell, 

De  Lano, 


YEAS— 132. 

Goodnight, 

Grimes, 

Hare, 

Hayes, 

Haynes, 

Heard, 

Hemphill, 

Hender80n,N, 

Herbert, 

Hermann, 

Hoi  man, 

Kelley, 

Kilgore, 

Lane, 

Lanham, 

Lee, 

LesTer,  Ga. 

Lester,  Va. 

Lewis, 

Magner, 

Maish, 

Mansur, 

Martin,  Ind. 

McAdoo, 

McClammy, 

McClellan, 

McCrearV; 

NAYS— 130. 


McMillin, 
McRae, 
Mills, 

Montgomery, 
Moore,  Tex. 
Morrow, 
Norton, 
C.Oates, 
O'Neall,  Ind. 
O'Neil,  Mass. 
Owens,  Ohio, 
Parrett, 
Paynter, 
Peel, 

Penington, 
Perry, 
Quinn, 
Reilly, 
Richardson, 
Robertson, 
Rowland, 
Rusk, 
Siyerri, 
Shively, 
Spinola, 
Springer, 
Stewart,  Ga. 


Harmer, 

Hauger, 

Henderson,  111. 

Henderson,  la. 

Hill 

Hitt, 

Kennedy, 

Kerr,  Iowa, 

Ketcham, 


Morrill, 
Morse, 
Mudd, 

Niedringhaus, 
O'Neill,  Pa. 
Osborne, 
Owen,  Ind. 
Pay  son, 
Perkins, 


Stewart,  Tex. 

Stock  dale. 

Stone,  Ky. 

Stone,  Mo. 

Stump, 

Tarsney, 

Tillman, 

TownsendjCola* 

Tucker, 

Turner,  Ga. 

Turner,  N.  Y. 

Vaux, 

Venable, 

Wheeler,  Ala. 

WhiLing, 

Whitthorne, 

Wike, 

Wiley, 

Wilkinson, 

Willcox, 

Williams,  111. 

AVilson,  Mo. 

Wilson,  W.  Va. 

Y'oder. 


Smith,  W.  Va. 

Smyser, 

Snider, 

Spooner, 

Stephenson, 

Stewart,  Vl. 

Stivers, 

Stockbridge, 

Struble, 


122 


Selknap, 

Uolliver, 

Kinsey, 

Pickler, 

Sweney, 

Bergen, 

Dunnell, 

Knapp, 

Post, 

Taylor,  E.B. 

Bingham, 

Evane, 

Lacey, 

Pugsley, 

Taylor,  J.  D. 

Bliss, 

Ewart, 

La  Follette, 

Raines, 

Thomas, 

Boothman, 

Farquhar, 

Laidlaw, 

Randall, 

Tracey, 

Boutelle, 

Finley, 

Lawp, 

Reed,  Iowa, 

Turner,  Kans. 

Bowden, 

Flick, 

Lehlbach, 

Reyburn, 

Vandever, 

Brewer, 

Flood, 

Lind, 

Rife, 

Van  Schaick, 

Brosius, 

Frank, 

Lodge, 

Rockwell, 

Waddill, 

Brower, 

Funston, 

McComas, 

Rowell, 

Walker,  Mass. 

Browne,  Va. 

Gear, 

McOormick, 

RusseH, 

Wallace,  Mass. 

Buchanan,  N.  J. 

Gest, 

McKenna, 

Sanford, 

Wallace,  N.  Y. 

Burrows, 

Gifford, 

McKinley, 

Sawyer, 

Wickham, 

Burton, 

Greenhalge, 

Milep, 

Scull, 

Williams,  Ohio, 

Butte  rworth. 

Grosvenor, 

Milliken, 

Sherman, 

Wilson,  Kv. 

Candler,  Maes. 

Hall, 

Moffitt, 

Simonds, 

Wright, 

Cannon, 

Hansbrough, 

Moore,  N.  H. 

Smith,  111. 

Yardley. 

So  the  Journal  as  amended  was  approved. 

At  this  point  Mr.  Stewart,  of  Vermont,  presented  a  conference  re- 
port. Mr.  Bland  raised  the  question  of  consideration,  in  order  to  go 
to  the  Speaker's  table  and  take  up  the  silver  bill,  and  on  that  quse- 
tion  the  yeas  and  nays  were  ordered,  and  the  House  decided  to  con- 
eider  the  conference  report  instead  of  going  to  the  Speaker's  table 
to  take  up  the  silver  bill.  On  this  motion  the  yeas  were  141,  the 
nays  103. 

After  the  conference  report  was  disposed  of— 

Mr.  BLA.ND  said  :  Now,  Mr.  Speaker,  I  desire  to  submit  a  privileged  resolution. 
I  offer  a  resolution  to  take  from  the  Speaker's  table  a  Senate  bill  for  immediate 
consideration  in  the  Houee.  Inasmuch  as  the  Journal  of  the  House  was  corrected 
-and  approved 

A  Member.    What  bill? 

Mr.  BLAND.  The  bill  H.  R.  5381  with  Senate  amendments,  what  is  known  as 
the  silver  bill. 

It  will  be  remembered  that  the  House  correrted  and  approved  the  Journal.  This 
bill  came  over  from  the  Senate  with  certain  amendments  to  it,  and  by  the  vote  of 
the  House  taken  this  morning  it  is  shown  that  this  bill  is  upon  the  Speaker's 
table,  and  under  Rule  XXIV  should  be  laid  before  the  House  for  consideration. 
I  desire  to  offer  a  resolution  to  that  effect. 

Mr.  BLAND     Let  this  resolution  be  read. 

The  SPEAKER.  The  gentleman  raises  a  question  upon  the  resolution  which 
be  sends  to  the  desk.  The  Clerk  will  read  the  resolution,  so  that  the  House  may 
understand  the  question  presented. 

The  Clerk  read  as  follows  : 

"Resolved,  That  the  Speaker  lay  before  the  House  the  bill  No.  5081,  directing  the 
purchase  of  silver  bullion  and  the  issue  of  Treasury  notes  therefor,  and  for  other 
purposes,  with  Senate  amendments,  for  consideration." 

Mr.  McKINLEY.    I  make  the  point  of  order  that  that  is  not  now  in  order. 

Mr.  SPRINGER.    Why  not? 

Mr.  McKINLEY.  First,  I  make  the  point  of  order  that  the  motion  is  not  a  privi- 
leged motion,  and  that  under  the  rules  of  this  House  the  only  way  to  reach  the 
Speaker's  table  is  under  the  order  of  morning  business. 

Mr.  BLAND.  This  is  the  morning  business  and  is  the  regular  order  of  businees, 
which  I  am  demanding. 

Considerable  discussion  followed  the  introduction  of  this  resolu- 
tion.    Mr.  Conger  claimed  that  notwithstanding  the  adoption  of  the 


123 

Mills  resolution  to  correct  the  Journal  the  bill  was  in  his  committee 
:)ecause  it  had  physical  possession  of  it.  Mr.  Morrow,  of  Californiaj 
replied  as  follows  : 

Now,  the  mere  physical  fact  that  the  bill  is  in  the  hands  of  the  gentleman  from 
Iowa,  as  chairman  of  the  Committoe  on  Coinage,  Weights  and  Measarep,  haw 
nothing  whatever  to  do  with  thia  question.  Why,  any  mpmber  of  this  House 
aiay  proceed  to  the  desk  and  take  therefrom  any  bill  and  take  it  to  his  desk  and 
look  itover  to  ascertair  what  motion  or  order  shall  be  made  in  regard  to  it.  Butsach 
s  tiikinpr  from  the  Speaker's  table  is  not  a  reference  by  the  Speaker.  He  may  as- 
sent to  such  takirg,  but  such  action  does  not  confer  any  jurisdiction  over  the  bill 
n  1  he  hands  of  such  a  member.  If  the  hill  is  therefore  in  tne  hands  of  any  member 
vr  committee  it  is  there  without  authority  of  law  and  should  be  returned  at  once. 

After  nnicli  discussion,  the  Speaker  ruled  that  Mr.  Bland's  reso- 
lution was  not  in  order.  Mr.  Bland  appealed  from  the  decision  of 
the  Chair.  Mr.  McKinler  moved  to  lay  the  appeal  on  the  table, 
pending  which  Mr.  Crisp  mored  that  the  House  adjourn.  The 
House  refused  to  adjourn  by  a  vote  of  yeas  13,  nays  228,  but  at  5 
"clock  took  a  recess,  under  the  rules,  for  an  evening  session. 

June  21,  after  the  reading  of  the  Journal,  the  Speaker  stated 
that  the  question  was  upon  the  motion  to  lay  on  the  table  the  appeal 
from  the  Speaker's  ruling,  upon  which  the  yeas  and  nays  had  been 
ordered.  Mr.  Bland  proposed  to  withdraw  the  appeal.  This  was  ob- 
jected to.  Mr.  Bland  then  moved  to  reconsider  the  vote  by  which 
the  yeas  and  nays  were  ordered.  The  motion  of  Mr.  Bland  to  recon- 
sider was  lost;  yeas  92,  nays  122.  The  question  then  recurred  upon 
the  motion  of  Mr.  McKinley  to  lay  on  the  table  the  appeal  from  the 
Speaker's  ruling  taken  by  Mr.  Bland.  On  this  motion  the  yeas  were 
146,  the  nays  45.  The  Speaker  then  ruled  that  the  bill  had  been 
properly  referred  to  the  Committee  on  Coinage,  Weights  and  Meas- 
ures, and  was  with  that  committee.  Mr.  Bland  appealed  from  this 
decision  of  the  Chair.  Mr.  McKinley  moved  to  lay  the  appeal  on 
the  table.  Considerable  discussion  followed  on  the  question  of 
the  reference  of  the  bill  to  the  Committee  on  Coinage,  Weights 
and  Measures,  during  which  incidentally  the  silver  question  was  dis- 
cussed. Those  in  favor  of  the  Senate  bill  argued  in  favor  of  the  im- 
mediate reference  of  the  bill  to  the  Committee  of  the  Whole  House  so 
that  a  vote  could  be  had  upon  it ;  those  opposed  to  the  bill  as  it  came 
from  the  Senate  favored  its  reference  to  the  Coinage  Committee. 

In  this  debate  Mr.  Bland  said : 

Now,  the  l^peaker  has  claimed  that  because  the  Senate  amendments  required 
an  appropriation  for  a  different  purpose  from  the  House  bill  that  necessarily  sends 
it  to  the  Committee  of  the  Whole.  I  do  not  think  it  follows  at  h11.  The  appro- 
priation is  the  matter  that  is  material.  The  Senate  bill  provides  for  free  coinage  ; 
the  House  bill  provides  for  the  purchase  of  bullion.  But  the  appropriation  made 
by  the  Senate  bill,  the  language  used,  is  identical  with  that  of  the  House  bill, and 
so  far  as  the  purposes  and  the  objects  of  the  two  appropriations  are  concerned  it 
is  not  material. 


124 

But,  Mr.  Speaker,  I  contend  that  this  House  alrpady  has  settled  this  question, 
and  it  is  too  late  now  to  raise  that  point.  By  the  vote  of  this  House  striking  from 
the  Journal  the  reference  of  this  bill  or  the  record  of  it,-thi8  House  has  determined 
that  that,  bill  is  upon  the  Speaker's  table  now ;  and  it  will  not  do  to  say  that  be- 
cauee  the  House  struck  out  of  the  record  a  reference  that  was  null  and  void  that 
therefore  the  Speaker  can  now  refer  a  bill,  or  the  House  by  6uch  a  proceeding  as 
this  can  refer  it.  The  reference  of  the  Speaker,  accordins;  to  the  voe  of  the 
House,  and  it  was  based  upon  that — and  tlie  whole  argument  was  based  upon  the 
proposition  that  the  Speaker  had  no  jurisdiction  over  the  subject-matter  of  that 
bill  to  dispose  of  it  in  the  way  he  did,  and  that  his  act  was  a  nullity.    *    *    * 

Now,  I  say  this  master  is  already  settled  by  a  vote  of  this  House.  This  bill  is 
now  practically  upon  the  Speaker's  table,  and  if  this  reference  and  this  decision 
of  the  Speaker  is  voted  down  we  have  but  one  thing  to  do,  and  that  is  to  go  to 
the  Speaker's  table  and  take  this  bill  up  and  pass  it,  or  else  get  a  conference  com- 
mittee and  have  a  conference  between  the  House  and  the  Senate  and  agree  upon 
some  bill  that  maybe  passed. 

Mr.  SPRINGER.  I  desire  to  call  the  attention  of  the  House  to  the  fact  that 
the  Speaker  is  under  a  misapprehension  with  rfgard  to  the  practice  of  the  House 
heretofore  with  reference  to  House  bills  with  Senate  amendments.  The  Speaker 
stated  to  the  House  the  day  before  yesterday  that  the  reference  of  this  bill,  out 
of  the  session  of  the  House,  to  the  Committee  on  Coinage,  Weights  and  Measures^ 
was  not  an  unusual  procedure,  but  was  in  the  ordinary  course  of  business.  He 
Eaid : 

"In  the  regular  course  of  business  the  officer  of  the  House  to  whom  the  Speaker 
has  intrusted  the  clerical  work  of  the  reference  of  bills,  the  J  ournal  clerk,  informed 
the  Speaker  that  upon  his  list  of  bills  which  were  to  be  referred,  under  the  rules, 
to  committees  of  the  House,  in  the  same  manner  as  hundreds,  and  possibly  thou- 
sands, of  bills  have  been  referred  heretofore,  was  the  bill  known  a.s  the  bill  for  sil- 
ver coinage  which  had  come  from  the  Senate,  and  the  Chair  was  asked  if  he  had 
any  particular  direction  to  make  in  regard  to  it." 

The  Speaker  further  said  : 

"  What,  thtn,  was  the  duty  of  the  Speaker  in  regard  to  it?  Obviously,  to  refer 
it  in  the  same  manner  in  which  hundreds  and  thousands  of  bills  have  been  re- 
ferred at  this  session. 

Now,  I  was  led  to  believe  from  that  ftatement  that  hundreds  and  thousands  of 
bills  in  the  same  parliamentary  situation  as  this  bill  had  been  so  referred  by  the 
Speaker  during  this  session  of  Congress,  but  I  have  taken  the  pains,  in  two  hours' 
time  this  morning,  to  examine  every  page  of  the  Congressional  Record  where  such 
references  appear,  and  I  say  here  now,  and  this  Record  will  prove  it,  that  the  sil- 
ver bill  is  the  only  bill  of  this  kind  that  has  been  so  referred.  [A.pplause  on  the 
Democratic  side.] 

Mr.  PETERS.  The  gentleman  from  Illinois  will  remember  that  every  appro- 
priation bill  that  comes  back  from  the  Senate  with  amendments  is  referred  to  the 
Committee  on  Appropriations  in  the  same  way. 

Mr.  SPRINGER.  I  deny  it;  I  deny  it;  and  I  challenge  the  gentleman  from 
Kansas,  and  I  challenge  the  Speaker  to  point  to  the  Congressional  Record  of  thi» 
House  which  shows  a  single  case  in  which  a  House  bill  with  a  Senate  amendment 
has  been  referred  to  a  standing  committee  of  this  House  by  the  Speaker  without 
calling  the  attention  of  the  House  to  it.  Now,  I  stand  upon  the  Recot'd  and  I  chal- 
lenge any  gentleman  to  produce  any  evidence  to  the  contrary  of  what  I  have 
stated.  The  Speaker  made  that  statement  in  order  to  influence  the  judgment  of 
this  House  at  the  very  time  his  action  in  referring  this  bill  was  under  considera- 
tion and  when  no  answer  could  be  made  to  it.  [Applause  on  the  Democratic  side.] 
****«■*  •)(•* 

This  is  a  House  bill  with  Senate  amendments  to  it ;  and  I  reassert  the  fiu;t  that 
no  other  bill  of  this  kind  has  ever  been  referred  by  the  Speaker  of  this  House  to 
a  standing  committee,  so  far  as  appears  in  our  proceedings,  as  recorded  in  the  Con- 
gresssional  Record. 

Mr.  CRISP.  As  I  intend,  Mr.  Speaker,  to  vote  to  sustain  the  appeal  from  the 
decision  of  the  Chair,  I  desire  to  say  a  word  or  two  respecting  the  reasons  whish 
influence  my  vote. 

As  the  Speaker  has  often  stated,  the  rules  of  the  Hoase  are  a  growth.  They 
come  from  experience  and  practice.    Very  often  the  impression  the  individoat 


125 

Representative  has  as  to  what  ought  to  be  done  under  a  given  rale,  as  it  stands  in 
our  code,  is  inconsistent  with  the  usage  and  practice  of  the  Hoiise  under  such  rule. 

I  can  cite  members  to  many  instances  of  this.  Under  the  old  rules  the  Speaker 
was  expressly  forbidden  after  the  second  roll-call  to  r^•cognize  a  gentleman  to  ask 
nnanimous  consent  to  cafit  his  vote;  and  yet  for  very  many  years,  n-^twithsiand- 
ing  that  express  rule,  the  practice  of  the  Speaker,  assented  to  by  the  House,  was 
wherever  a  gentleman  stated  that  he  was  in  his  seat  during  the  roll-call  and  had 
not  voted  ,  to  permit  him  to  vote.  The  rule  seemed  plain  and  unequivocal,  and 
yt't  the  practice  under  it  was  essentially  different  frooa  the  rule  itself. 

Now,  take  the  rule  under  which  the'  Speaker  referred  this  bill.  Whatever  my 
impression  or  your  impression  may  be  as  to  the  meaning  of  the  rule,  standing 
alone,  when  we  c  >me  to  vote  on  its  construction  we  must  vote  in  the  light  of  the 
decisions  heretofore  made  upon  it  and  the  practice  of  ihe  House  under  it.  I  have 
referred  the  House  on  a  previous  occasion  to  the  decision  «<f  the  present  Speaker 
made  when  a  point  of  order  was  raised  that  the  House  bill  for  the  condemnation 
of  land  in  the  District  of  Columbia  for  a  post-office  building,  which  hal  been 
amended  in  the  Senate  so  as  to  maks  it  carrv  an  appropriation,  was  not  snch  a  bill 
as,  under  the  mies  and  practice  of  the  Housi^,  could  bf  taken  from  the  Speaker's 
table  and  laid  before  the  H  ju-,e  for  consideration  ;  the  Speaker  distinctly  decided 
that  it  was  his  duty  to  submit  the  bill  to  the  House  for  its  action. 

The  gentleman  from  Illinois  [Mr.  Springer]  has  shown  you  that  during  this 
whole  session  of  Congress  the  silver  bill  is  the  first  Housh  bill  with  a  Senate  amend- 
ment which  ha"  been  privately  referred.  Why,  Mr.  Speaker,  on  the  bill  involving 
the  question  of  coinage  of  silver,  should  we  depart  from  what  has  been  the  usage 
and  practice  of  the  House?  What  is  there  peculiar  in  legislation  respecting  silver 
which  seems  to  make  a  certain  party  in  this  House  and  country  so  anxious  to  do 
secretly  that  which  they  do  in  regard  to  it?  We  are  told,  and  we  believe  it,  that 
the  demonetization  of  silver  was  a  secret  proceps ;  that  it  was  done  without  full 
notice.    It  was  done  when  the  people  were  not  aware  of  what  was  being  done. 

Here  we  have  a  repetition  of  those  tactics.  Here  we  find  a  Hoas«  bill  coming 
from  the  Senate  with  an  amendment  providing  for  the  free  coinage  of  silver.  Here 
you  find  that  as  to  that  bill,  the  ordinary  course  of  parliamentary  procedure  in 
respect  to  such  matters  is  not  followed,  but  a  new  and  different  practice  obtains. 
The  bill  is  not  laid  before  the  House,  but  id  secretly  referred  to  a  committee.  We 
are  not  permitted  to  consider  the  legislation  proposed  by  the  Senate;  we  are  not 
permitted  to  have  a  direct  vote  upon  the  Senate  amendment. 

Mr.  TOWN  SEND,  of  Colorado.  Mr.  Speaker,  I  will  not  attempt  to  say  any- 
thing that  would  throw  anv  light  with  reference  to  the  quest i-m  of  the  rule. 
Many  gentlemen  are  better  fit  to  disfu-js  that  matter  thnn  I  am,  but  I  say  this:  It 
does  seem  to  me  that  this  question,  if  it  is  not,  ought  to  be  res  adjudicata,  so  far  as 
the  present  action  is  proposed.  Now,  sir,  if  I  did  not  believe  that  this  w-is  the  only 
way  to  the  consideration  of  the  free  coinage  of  silver,  I  might  cast  a  diffnrent  vote 
from  what  I  have  cast,  and  I  know,  and  gentlemen  on  this  floor  know,  how,  when 
this  bill  was  before  the  House  for  consideration  in  the  first  instance,  there  was  no 
opportunity  or  permission  given  to  ofier  any  amendment  except  such  as  was  at 
the  disposal  of  th'S  Committee  on  Coinage,  Weights  and  Measures ;  and  if  this 
bill  should  go  to  that  committf*e,  we  have  no  reason  to  believe  that  this  House 
will  ever  be  permitted  to  ca-t  a  vote  for  the  free  coinage  of  silver. 

Now,  Mr.  Speaker,  the  people  whom  I  have  the  honor  to  represent  upon  this 
floor  are  for  the  free  coinage  of  silver,  everv  man,  woman,  and  child  of  every 
party  in  that  State  ;  and  diH  I  not  vote  for  an  opportunity  to  get  consideration  of 
that  question  I  would  be  unfaithful  to  the  people  whom  I  represent  upon  this 
floor.  [Applause.]  They  look  upon  the  demonetization  of  silver  as  the  most  in- 
famous crime  that  ever  was  perpetrated  upon  a  producing  people  of  this  country 
and  upon  the  people  of  this  world.  [Applause]  They  desire  to  have  that  re- 
versed. We  simply  want  to  get  the  mater  up  here  so  that  we  can  reverse  it,  if 
the  majority  of  this  House  sees  fit  to  do  so.  I  believ«  it  is  wise,  and  I  believe  It 
is  the  thine  to  do,  and  so  believing,  and  so  being  practically  instructed  by  my 
people,  I  shall  vote  in  every  way  I  can  to  get  to  the  consideration  of  this  bill. 
[Applause.] 

Mr.  MORROW.  Mr.  Speaker,  when  the  present  Congress  assembled  it  was 
eonfronted  with  the  complaint  that  in  preceding  Congresses  public  business  had 
Bot  been  transacted  as  the  people  of  the  country  desired  and  expected.    Durijig 


126 

the  last  year  the  subject  was  a  matter  of  discussion  amonpj  the  people,  and  in  the 
leading  magazines  in  the  country  by  the  leaders  of  both  parties.  The  people  de- 
manded, very  properly,  that  there  should  be  soms  modification  of  the  rules  of  this 
House  in  order  that"  legislation  should  be  expedited,  and  that  the  business  of 
the  House  might  be  transacted.  There  w«re  many  difficulties  in  the  way.  Some 
of  them  have  not  been  and  may  never  be  removed. 

The  Committee  on  Rales  reported  certain  modification  of  the  rules  of  the 
former  Congress,  and  among  the  modifications  was  an  amandtnent  or  amend- 
mentfj  to  Rule  XXIV  of  the  preceding  Congress.  This  is  ttie  rule  that  relates  to 
the  order  ol  business,  and  as  amended  it  provides  for  the  immediate  consideration 
of  busmess  coming  on  to  the  Speaker's  table  from  the  Senate. 

*  >|c  *  «  4>  *  * 

Mr.  Speaker,  I  desire  to  call  your  attention  to  this  provision  that  follows : 
''  Senate  bills,  substantially  the  same  as  House  bills,  already  favorably  reported 
by  a  committee  of  the  House,  and  not  required  to  be  considered  in  Committee  of 
the  Whole,  may  also  be  disposed  of  in  the  same  manner  on  motion  directed  to  be 
made  by  such  Committee." 

Now,  this  last  provision  was  a  new  method  of  procedure  adopted  for  the  con- 
sideration of  Senate  bills.  It  was  for  the  purpose  of  enabling  committees  to  take 
from  the  Speaker's  table  a  bill  from  the  Sanate  when  substantially  the  same  bill 
had  been  reported  by  a  House  committee  for  the  consideration  of  the  House 
Unquestionably  this  facilitated  business,  because  it  did  away  with  the  necessity 
of  referrins^  the  Senate  bill  to  a  committee,  and  probably  in  the  end  sending  it  to 
the  foot  of  the  House  Calendar.  So  it  has  happened  during  the  present  ses  <ion  of 
this  House  that  many  Senate  bills  have  become  laws  which  under  the  old  rules 
would  to  day  be  at  the  foot  of  the  Calendar,  and  these  laws  owe  their  existence 
on  the  statute-book  to  the  very  fact  that  under  this  rule  they  have  been  taken 
from  the  Speaker's  table  and  passed  because  of  the  privilege  of  immediate  con- 
sideration provided  for  by  this  rule. 

*♦***»* 

Now  the  same  reason  for  immediate  consideration  obtains  where  a  bill  baa 
passed  the  House  and  has  been  amended  and  passed  the  Senate.  It  has  progressed 
to  a  point  where  the  prompt  dispatch  of  business  requires  that  it  should  be  taken 
from  the  Speaker's  table  and  laid  before  the  House  for  immediate  action. 

Now,  assuming  that  the  amendments  to  the  bill  under  consideration  render  the 
bill  subjk^ct  to  the  point  of  order,  what  is  to  be  done  with  the  bill  ?  It  is  on  the 
Speaker's  table.  It  should  be  laid  before  the  House,  and  if  the  point  of  order  is 
made  it  mu3t  be  considered  bv  the  Committee  of  the  Whole  House,  and  I  submit 
that  a  motion  would  then  be  in  order  for  the  House  to  resolve  itself  into  the  Com- 
mittee of  the  Whole  House  for  the  purpose  of  considering  the  bill. 

Mr.  HERMANN.  Mr.  Speaker,  it  is  a  matter  of  most  profound  regret  to  me  to 
disagree  with  a  large  proportion  of  my  associates  upon  this  side  of  the  Chamber,, 
and  I  feel  that  it  is  incumbent  upon  me  to  state  to  the  House  and  to  the  country 
the  position  in  which  I  am  situated  with  regard  to  this  question.  I  am  here  as  a 
Representative  of  the  people  of  Oregon,  and  as  such  I  feel  it  to  be  my  boundea 
duty  and  obligation  to  represent  those  people  to  the  very  best  of  my  ability  and 
according  to  tbeir  wishes  and  their  interest. 

But  recently,  within  four  weeks,  thii  question  with  othera  was  made  an  issue 
before  the  people  of  Oregon  m  an  election.  Both  parties  went  before  them  with 
substantially  the  same  platform.  I  stood  upon  the  platform  of  the  Republican 
party  and  indorsed  the  sentiments  it  contained.  I  aereed  to  abide  by  the  wishes 
of  the  party  as  set  forth  in  that  platform,  and  I  engaged  that  after  I  was  elected 
as  a  Representative  to  Congress  from  that  State  I  would  endeavor  to  carry  out 
those  wwhes  as  the  wishes  of  the  whole  people  to  the  best  of  my  ability. 

In  order  that  my  associates  upon  this  side,  particularly,  may  understand  the- 
pledge  which  I  have  made  to  those  people,  and  the  sentiments  which  they  have 
expressed  on  this  question,  indeed  I  may  say  the  instructions  which  they  have 
given  me  to  execute,  I  will  take  the  liberty  of  reading  from  the  platform  of  the  Re- 
publican party  of  Oregon. 

"6.  That,  recognizing  the  fact  that  the  United  States  is  the  greatest  silver- pro- 
ducing country  in  the  world,  and  that  both  gold  and  silver  were  equally  the  money 
of  the  Constitution  from  the  beginning  of  the  Republic  until  the  hostile  legisla- 
tion against  silver  which  unduly  contracted  the  circulating  medium  of  the  country , 
and  recognizing  that  the  great  interests  of  the  people  demanded  more  money  for 


127 

use  in  the  channels  of  trade  and  commerce,  therefore  we  declare  ourselves  in 
favor  of  the  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  silver  and  denounce  any  attempt  to 
discriminate  against  silver  as  unwise  and  unjust." 

Mr.  Speaker,  those  are  my  "  sailing  orders,"  and  I  feel  it  my  duty  as  a  conscien 
tious  Representative,  upon  all  questions  and  upon  all  motions  in  w/)ich  the  sub- 
ject may  be  involved,  to  obey  those  instructions  to  the  best  of  my  ability.    I  pro- 
pose to  stand  or  fall  by  them. 

Mr.  CARTER.  Mr.' Speaker,  the  action  of  this  House  on  j'epterday,  from  mv 
point  of  view,  was  but  the  exercise  of  the  supreme  right  of  the  House,  recognized 
by  the  Speaker  himself,  to  control  the  business  of  the  House.  The  opinion  has^ 
been  expressed  by  parliamentarians  on  both  sides  of  this  Chamber  that  the  refer- 
ence of  the  bill  to  the  Committee  on  Coinage,  Weights  and  Measures  was  an  au- 
thorized act,  and  the  defeat  of  the  preamble  to  the  resolution  of  the  gentleman 
from  Texas  emphasized  that  view.  But,  independent  of  the  reference,  regardless 
of  the  right  to  make  it,  stood  the  supreme  right  of  the  House  not  only  to  undo  that 
which  the  Saeaker,  as  the  authorized  organ  of  the  House,  bad  done,  but  to  undo- 
that  which  the  House  itself  might  have  done  the  day  preceding. 

I  propose  to  consistently  support  the  votes  cast  by  me  upon  yesterday,  and  that 
position  I  will  maintain  for  the  reason  that  I  believe  such  course  to  be  the  most 
direct  and  business-like  way  of  reaching  and  disposing  of  the  momentous  question 
in  hand.  It  would  be  entirely  proper  to  refer  this  bill  to  the  Committee  on  Coin- 
age, Weights  and  Measures.  Who  can  assert  that  it  is  not  equally  proper  for  the 
House  to  hold  the  bill  and  act  upon  it  without  the  intervention  of  that  committee  ? 
Does  the  assertion  of  this  supreme  right  by  the  House  imply  reflection  upon  any 
member  or  any  officer  of  the  House?  Not  at  all.  So  believing,  I  propose  to  com- 
bine with  those  who  hold  similar  sentiments  to  my  own  in  asserting  the  right  of 
the  House  to  dispose  of  its  own  business  in  its  own  way.  That  right  no  gentleman 
in  this  body  recognizes  more  clearly  than  the  eminent  Speaker  who  presides  over 
the  deliberations  of  the  House.  We  can  dispose  of  this  bill  to-day  with  as  much 
intelligence  as  we  can  bring  to  bear  upon  it  at  any  other  time. 

Mr.  BARTINE.  I  suppose  that  every  member  of  this  House  is  perfectly  aware 
of  the  fact  that  every  gentleman  upon  this  floor  who  represents  a  silver-pro:^  ucing 
constituency  represents  one,  every  individual  of  which  is  in  favor  of  the  free  coinasre 
of  silver.  For  that  reason  gentlemen  representing  those  States  do  not  approach 
this  question  in  a  purely  technical  spirit.  We  are  all  of  us  new  members  of  this 
House.  We  do  not  claim  to  be  great  parliamentflrians,  and  for  that  reason  we  have 
not  undertaken  to  disc"ss  the  refinements  of  parliamentary  law,  which  have  been 
presented  durinar  the  course  of  this  debate ;  but  there  is  one  thing  which,  as  a  mat- 
ter of  plain  common  sense,  I  wish  to  suggest.  While  I  do  not  claim  to  understand 
parliamentary  law,  I  do  claim  to  understand  p'ain,  simple,  <  ommonplace  Ecgli'-h 
when  it  is  presented  to  my  gaze.  The  rule  under  which  we  are  acting,  and  under 
which  it  is  proposed  to  act,  makes  the  statement  that  when  a  House  bill  is  returned 
with  a  Senate  amendment  it  may  be  considered  and  disposed  of  by  the  House^ 
unless  it  requires  consideration  in  a  Committee  of  the  Whole. 

Now,  I  do  not  see  how  an  exception  requiring  the  consideration  of  a  bill  in  a 
Committee  of  the  Whole  requires  its  consideration  by  the  Committee  on  Coinage, 
Weights  and  Measures.  The  little  that  I  know  about  law  amounts  to  just  this, 
that  when  a  thing  is  expressly  mentioned  in  a  statute,  everything  e^se  that  is  not 
mentioned  is  excluded,  and  when  this  rule  says  that  a  bill  of  this  kind  may  require 
consideration  in  a  Committee  of  the  Whole,  it  carries  with  it  the  necessary  impli- 
cation that  that  consideration  must  be  in  a  Committee  of  the  Whole  and  not  any- 
where else;  and  sending  the  bill  to  the  Committee  on  Coinage,  Weights  and  Meas- 
ures does  not  even  tend  to  get  it  into  a  Committee  of  the  Whole. 

Now,  then,  aside  from  all  technicalities,  I  regard  the  great  question  involved  in 
this  contest  as  being  simply  this:  Shall  we  have  the  opporLunity  of  voting  fairly 
and  squarely  upon  the  question  of  free  coinage? 

Mr.  CLEMENTS.  Mr.  Speaker,  this  ought  not  to  be  a  political  or  partisan  ques- 
tion, and  I  shall  not  discuss  it  as  such.  It  appears  to  me,  however,  to  be  an  ap- 
peal on  the  part  of  the  Speaker  from  the  decision  of  the  House  which  was  ren- 
dered yesterday.  The  House,  after  voting  down  numerous  dilatory  motions,  de- 
cided at  last  to  erase  from  the  Journal  the  declaration  that  this  bill  had  been  sent 
to  the  Committee  on  Coinage,  Weights  and  Measures.  If  the  Speaker  has  the 
power  this  morning  in  open  House  to  send  it  there,  he  had  the  power  to  do  it 
privately  the  other  day  when  he  attemplied  to  do  so. 


128 

This  is  simply  a  question  as  to  whether  or  not  the  Representatives  of  the  people 
shall  have  the  right  to  execute  the  will  of  the  people ;  and  I  want  to  say  to  the 
friends  of  free  coinage  of  silver  on  either  side  of  the  House  this  word  of  warning: 
If  you  pass  this  station  the  probability  is  you  will  r^ot  have  another  opportu- 
nity to  vote  on  the  question  of  free  coinage  of  eilver  upon  this  bill.  I  say  this  in 
the  light  of  the  history  o^  the  proceedings  on  this  bill  in  tht-  House  before  it  went 
to  the  Senate  and  the  proceedings  riere  during  the  last  two  day:?. 

Now,  certainly  the  condition  of  this  country  ia  such— and  a  majority  of  the  peo- 
ple recognize  that  condition  to  be  such — that  there  ought  to  be  a  large  increase  of 
the  circulating  medium  in  order  to  respond  to  the  demands  of  the  growing  busi- 
ness and  trade  of  the  country,  and  to  relieve  the  present  depression.  Here  is  a 
direct  opportunity,  if  the  representatives  of  the  people  decide  to  avail  themselves 
of  it,  to  vote  to  execute  that  will ;  and  no  technical  reason  ought  to  stand  between 
the  Representatives  of  the  people  and  a  direct  vote  on  this  question. 

Mr.  Fitch  expressed  the  views  of  certain  anti-silver  Democrats  as 

follows : 

Mr.  FITCH.  Mr.  Speaker,  I  have  been  one  of  those  nho  for  a  couple  of  days 
past  have  insisted  that  this  bill  should  not  be  sent  to  a  committee  by  the  Speaker 
without  an  opportunity  for  the  House  to  appeal  from  his  decision  and  to  debate 
that  bill  and  vote  upon  it ;  and  I  have  rejiiced  with  my  other  friends  that  there 
are  Republicans  on  the  other  side  who  are  willing  to  take  that  view  of  the  subject 
and  go  along  with  us  to  the  success  which  we  achieved  in  connection  with  the 
matter  on  yesterday.  But  to- day,  Mr.  Speaker,  it  is  claimed  on  both  sides  of  the 
House  thnt  this  is  a  victory  for  free  coinaffe,  and  those  of  us  who  do  not  believe  in 
free  coinage  are  called  upon  to  go  on  with  this  crusade,  ns  my  distinguished  friend 
has  said,  to  have  immediate  consideration  for  the  silver  bill  and  its  final  passage 
under  the  previous  question. 

Mr.  BLAND.    Oh,  no;  we  want  consideration  only. 

Mr.  FI  rCH.  When  it  comes  to  that  point  my  friend  from  Montana  [Mr.  Cabter] 
says  that  he,  combined  with  those  on  this  side  of  the  House  who  agree  with  him, 
can  secure  it.  Now,  Mr.  Speaker,  he  can  not  combine  with  me  on  that  branch  of 
the  silver  question.  [Laughter.]  So  far  as  lam  concerned,  I  will  vote  to  send 
this  bill  to  the  Committee  on  Coinage,  Weights  and  Measures,  on  which  there  are 
diatinguished  Democrats,  in  which  committee  it  can  oe  fully  considered,  so  that 
we  may  have  a  full,  fair,  and  open  discussion  of  the  subject.  Then  when  it  comes 
back  to  the  House,  if  there  is  a  majority  on  both  sides  of  the  House  who  are  will- 
ing to  go  to  the  extreme  length  which  my  people  at  least  do  not  approve,  then  it 
will  have  been  at  all  events  considered  in  order  under  the  rules,  and  those  who 
believe  as  I  do  upon  the  subject  will  not  be  held  responsible. 

For  the  gentleman  from  Georgia  no  one  has  more  admiration  or  higher  respect 
— I  refer  to  the  gentleman  from  Georgia,  Mr.  Crisp — than  I  have.  But  the  gentle- 
man made  a  little  mistake  to  day  when  he  said  that  some  Republicans,  combined 
with  all  the  Democrats  of  the  House,  had  voted  in  favor  of  this  subject  of  free 

coinage. 

******* 

Mr.  CANNON.  Mr.  Speaker,  I  am  for  the  consideration  of  this  bill;  I  am  for 
the  enactment  of  silver  legislation.  There  is  no  man  on  the  floor  of  this  House 
that  more  heartily  desires  the  use  of  both  metals  for  money  than  I  do.  But  ia 
treating  of  this  question,  and  in  legislating  about  it,  I  propose,  so  far  as  my  vote 
goes,  to  proceed  in  an  orderly  way  by  the  aid  of  a  majority  of  the  House,  under 
the  rules  of  the  House  to  consider,  to  determine,  to  legislate. 

On  the  question  of  appeal  made  by  Mr.  Bland,  Mr.  McCreary  said  : 

Mr.  Speaker,  I  am  in  favor  of  the  resolution  offered  by  the  gentleman  from. 
Missouri  [VIr.  Bland],  which  requests  the  Speaker  to  lay  before  the  House  the  bill 
5381  with  the  amendments  of  the  Senate  thereto.  But  before  action  can  be  had 
upon  that  resolution  the  point  of  order  raised  by  the  gentleman  from  Iowa  [Mr. 
Conger]  must  be  decided. 

Responding  in  the  beginning  of  my  remarks  to  the  gentleman  from  Iowa  [Mr. 
Conger],  who  says  that  this  bill  as  early  as  11  o'clock  on  yesterday  was  sent  to 
the  Committee  on  Coinage,  Weights  and  Measures,  of  which  he  is  chairman,  and 


129 

receipted  for  by  him  or  by  hie  clerk,  I  wish  to  say  that  under  the  Constitution  of 
the  United  States,  if  we  have  proper  respect  for  that  instrument,  that  bill  should 
not  have  been  sent  to  that  committee  at  that  time.  There  was  no  warrant  of  au- 
thority to  send  it  to  that  committee,  and  he  had  no  right  to  receipt  for  it. 

The  Constitution  of  the  United  States  provides,  in  section  5,  Article  I,  that 
"  each  House  shall  keep  a  journal  of  its  proceedings,"  and  the  Journal  which  con- 
tained the  Speaker's  order  referring  the  bill  in  regard  to  "the  purchase  of  silver 
bullion  and  the  iesue  of  Treasury  notes  thereon  "  to  the  Committee  on  Coinage, 
Weights  and  Measures  had  not  been  approved  by  the  House  at  that  time,  and 
therefore  it  v^as  not  proper  to  send  the  bill  then  to  that  committee.  The  Journal 
containing  the  order  referred  to  wa<3  not  approved  until  to-day,  and  before  it  was 
aoproved  the  order  of  the  Speaker  re/erring  the  bill  to  the  Committee  on  Coinage, 
Wtjights  and  Measures  was  under  a  resolution  adopted  by  this  House  ordered  to 
be  stricken  out. 

Mr.  Speaker,  if  each  House  is  required  by  the  Constitution  to  keep  a  journal  of 
its  proceedings,  it  is  clear  that  until  the  Journal  was  approved  by  the  House  the 
Clerk  of  this  House  had  no  right,  and  no  person  had  authority  to  take  House  bill 
5381  from  the  Speaker's  table  to  the  committee-room  or  elsewhere,  and  the  gentle- 
man from  Iowa  had  no  right  to  receipt  for  it,  and  if  he  did  receipt  for  it,  his  action 
was  absolutely  void. 

Mr.  PERKINS.  Mr.  Speaker,  I  do  not  consider  the  pending  appeal  from  the 
decision  of  the  Chair  a  question  as  to  whether  we  shall  have  free  coinage  or  some- 
thing less  than  that,  or  whether  we  shall  have  legislation  upon  this  important  sub- 
ject or  not.  In  my  judgment  the  question  that  we  ai*e  called  to  consider  and  de- 
termine now  is  one  whether,  according  to  the  rules  of  this  House,  we  will  have  an 
orderly  and  methodical  consideration  of  business,  and  thoughtful  and  patriotic 
legislation,  or  whether,  without  consideration,  without  deliberation,  and  in  viola- 
tion of  the  rules,  there  shall  be  forced  through  this  House  a  measure  honestly 
believed  in  by  many,  but  forced  through  under  circumstances  that  if  possible  will 
induce  an  Executive  veto  when  presented  to  the  President  of  the  United  States 
for  his  consideration. 

I  know  many  gentlemen  upon  the  other  side  of  this  House  personally,  and  I 
know  them  as  individuals  to  be  reputable  and  deserving  gentlemen,  but  they 
deem  that  their  allegiance  is  to  the  Democracy  of  the  United  States,  and  collect- 
ively, in  my  judgment,  they  would  wreck  the  business  interests  of  this  country,  if 
by  doing  so  they  could  advance  the  interests  of  the  Democratic  party.  [Applause 
on  the  Republican  side.]  To-day,  yesterday,  and  the  day  before  we  saw  them 
unitedly  contending  for  the  position  thev  assumed,  not  in  the  interests  of  free 
coinage,  not  in  the  interest  of  wise  legislation,  and  not  to  secure  the  passage  of  a 
bill  that  would  give  us  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  silver,  but  to  force  through 
this  House  a  measure  under  circumstances  that  if  possible  would  compel  the  Execu- 
tive of  this  nation  to  veto  it,  because  it  did  not  secure  the  sanction  of  a  deliberative 
body.     [Derisive  jeers  on  the  Democratic  side.] 

Mr.  CONNELL.  Mr.  Speaker,  like  my  friend  from  Nevada  [  Mr.  Bartine]  I  am 
a  new  member,  from  the  wild  and  woolly  West.  I  am  free  to  admit  that  I  have 
only  a  limited  knowledge  regarding  national  legislation.  I  confess  I  am  inexpe- 
rienced so  far  as  the  rules  and  practice  of  this  House  are  concerned. 

It  may  be  that  it  is  due  to  such  limited  knowledge  and  inexperience  that  I  am 
unable  to  understand  the  position  of  Republican  members  about  me  who  declare 
in  favor  of  free  coinage  and  vote  in  the  opposite  direction.  There  is  much  regard- 
ing the  rules  and  procedure  of  this  House  which  I  do  not  understand. 

But  I  do  not  propose,  in  the  brief  space  of  two  minutes  which  has  been  yielded 
to  me,  to  undertake  to  tell  all  I  do  not  know,  as  that  would  be  impossible.  I  do 
wish,  however,  to  refer  to  one  thing  I  can  not  understand,  and  that  is,  why  this 
is  made  a  political  question,  I  can  not  see  why  a  line  should  be  drawn  from  the 
Speaker's  desk  through  the  center  of  this  Hall,  dividing  Democrat-s  and  Repub- 
licans. I  deny  that  this  is  a  political  question.  It  is  above  and  beyond  that,  and 
if  you  wait  until  the  roll  is  called  you  will  hear  members  on  the  other  side  voting 
according  to  their  convictions,  not  their  political  convictions,  but  according  to  their 
belief  on  this  question  of  free  coinage. 

Then,  why,  on  this  side,  should  not  members  who  are  in  favor  of  free  and  un- 
limited coinage  of  silver  vote  according  to  their  convictions,  vote  as  representa- 


130 

tives  of  the  people  who  sent  them  here?  Why  do  not  the  Western  members, 
who  know  the  sentiment  of  the  West,  stand  up  like  men  and  vote  according  to 
their  convictions,  and  vote  according  to  the  speeches  they  have  been  delivering 
here  in  this  House?  Now,  Mr.  Speaker,  there  is  one  other  thing  I  do  not  under- 
stand, and  that  is  why  those  who  favored  limited  debate  when  the  silver  bill  was 
originally  discussed,  are  now  pleading  for  time  for  its  further  consideration.  If  not 
for  the  purpose  of  "burying"  the  bill,  it  must  be  to  suspend  it,  like  Mohammed's 
coffin,  "  between  high  heaven  and  earth."  I  am  in  favor  of  meeting  all  questions 
arising  under  the  amendments  proposed  by  the  Senate  right  here  and  now. 

Mr.  SPRINGER.  It  is  in  violation  of  order  to  make  a  threat  of  an  executive 
veto  against  any  measure ;  and  I  want  to  make  that  point  against  the  remarks  of 
the  gentleman  from  Kansas.     [Applause  on  the  Democratic  side.] 

Mr.  HENDERSON,  of  Iowa.  I  say  that  the  bill  of  the  House  amended  by  the 
Senate,  with  the  judgment  of  the  Committee  on  Coinage,  Weights  and  Measures, 
will  be  reported  back  to  this  House  for  action,  and  I  expect  to  see  a  bill  passed 
that  will  provide  for  consuming  the  entire  product  of  the  silver  mines  of  this 
country.  In  spite  of  your  Democratic  opposition,  I  expect  to  see  such  a  bill 
enacted  into  law  with  the  sanction  of  a  Republican  President  before  this  Congress 
adjourns.     [Applause  on  the  Republican  side.] 

Mr.  CUTCHEON.  Mr.  Speaker,  it  seems  to  me  that  the  issue  presented  to  us 
this  morning  is  very  simple,  clear-cut,  and  well  defined.  It  is  not  whether  we  are 
in  favor  of  the  free  coinage  of  silver ;  it  is  not  whether  we  are  in  favor  of  the 
Senate  amendments  to  the  House  bill ;  but  the  sole  and  only  question  is  whether 
the  Speaker  of  this  House  has  acted  in  accordance  with  the  rules  of  this  House  in 
the  reference  of  this  bill  to  the  Committee  on  Coinage,  Weights  and  Measures. 

Now,  I  desire  to  corroborate  the  statement  of  my  friend  from  Iowa  [Mr.  Hen- 
derson] in  regard  to  the  practice  of  the  House.  It  happens  that  two  important 
bills,  both  appropriation  bills,  have  been  reported  from  the  Committee  on  Military 
AflEairs,  with  which  I  am  connected,  have  gone  from  the  House  to  the  Senate, 
have  been  there  amended  and  returned  to  the  House  with  the  Senate  amend- 
ments, and  have  been  referred  to  the  Committee  on  Military  Affairs,  precisely  as 
this  bill  was  referred  to  the  Committee  on  Coinage,  Weights  and  Measures. 

Mr.  CONGER.  Mr.  Speaker,  the  question  before  the  House  at  this  time  is  not 
whether  we  shall  have  free  coinage  or  shall  not  have  free  coinage,  but  it  is  a 
question  of  parliamentary  procedure  under  the  rules  of  this  House.  The  Speaker 
has  referred  a  bill  to  the  proper  committee  of  this  House  under  the  rules,  and  the 
question  is  whether  he  shall  be  sustained  in  that  proper  reference. 

No  question  of  equal  magnitude  with  the  measure  that  has  been  sent  over  to  us 
from  the  Senate  was  ever  acted  on  in  this  House  without  deliberate  consideration  by 
some  committee  of  the  House.  Why,  gentlemen,  the  bill  sent  over  here  from  the 
Senate  is  not  simply  a  free  coinage  bill.  There  are  matters  in  that  bill  which  have 
never  yet  been  discussed  in  either  branch  of  this  Congress. 

Why,  sir,  this  bill  goes  infinitely  beyond  the  free  coinage  of  silver.  It  not  only 
proposes  to  coin  all  the  silver  that  may  be  brought  to  our  mints  from  anywhere  in 
the  world  free  of  expense  to  the  holder,  but  it  also  provides  and  advertises  the 
fact  to  the  world  that  any  men  who  can  by  any  accumulation  of  capital  control 
the  purchase  of  silver  bullion  anywhere  in  the  worid  may  bring  it  immediately  to 
our  mints  and  be  paid  for  in  legal-tender  money  of  the  United  States,  at  a  price 
30  per  cent,  above  its  market  value,  and  fixed  and  guarantied  by  the  Government. 
Gentlemen,  I  say  there  are  not  three  districts  in  the  United  States  outside  of  the 
silver- producing  States  that  are  in  favor  of  such  a  proposition  as  that ;  and  the 
people  of  this  country  outside  of  those  districts  wonld  not  indorse  such  a  proposi- 
tion for  a  single  moment  if  they  understood  it.  Now,  gentlemen,  such  a  measure 
as  this  does  deserve  deliberate  consideration.  It  did  not  have  it  in  the  other  branch 
of  Congress. 

We  have  already  commented  on  the  absurd  daim  of"  the  chairman 
of  the  Committee  on  Coinage,  Weights  and  Measures  as  to  profits  on 
bullion  under  free  coinage.  The  statement  of  one  who  has  evinced  so 
little  knowledge  himself  of  the  money  question,  that  the  bill  which 


131 


passed  the  Senate  did  not  have  proper  consideration  in  that  body  is 
calculated  to  elicit  a  smile  from  those  who  are  able  to  compare  the 
chairman  of  the  House  committee  with  Senators  who  have  gained 
world-wide  reputations  for  their  knowledge  of  the  money  question, 
or  to  compare  the  entire  discussion  of  the  question  in  the  Senate 
witb  that  in  the  House.  What  Mr,  Conger  here  says  shows  that  he 
has  done  little  thinking,  or  very  poor  thinkings  on  the  subject  of 
which  his  committee  has  charge.  Indeed  it  is  difficult  to,understand 
how  one  who  had  ordinary  capacity  would  commit  himself  publicly 
to  a  statement  as  absurd  as  that  above  quoted. 

The  debate  throughout  showed  that  the  question  of  reference 
was  not  separated,  in  the  minds  of  members,  from  the  probable  out- 
come of  a  reference  to  the  Coinage  Committee. 

The  motion  was  stated  by  the  Speaker,  as  follows  : 

The  SPEAKER.  The  question  is  upon  the  motion  of  the  gentleman  from  Ohio 
[Mr.  McKinley].  The  Chair  has  announced  to  the  House  that  he  refers  the  bill 
to  the  Committee  on  Coinage,  Weights  and  Measures,  and  that  the  Chair  does  so 
under  the  rules  of  the  House  for  the  reasons  given.  The  gentleman  from  Mis- 
souri [Mr.  Bland]  appeals  from  the  decision  of  the  Chair,  and  the  gentleman  from 
Ohio  [Mr.  McKinley]  moves  to  lay  that  appeal  upon  the  table. 

The  yeas  and  nays  were  ordered. 

The  question  was  taken;  and  it  was  decided  in  the  affirmative — yea8jl44,nay8 
117,  not  voting  66 ;  as  follows  : 


YEAS— 144. 


Adams, 

Cheadle, 

Henderson,  111.  Mudd, 

Allen,  Mich. 

Cogswell, 

Henderson,  la 

Mutchler, 

Anderson,  Kans. 

Comstock, 

Hill, 

Niedringhaus, 

Arnold, 

Conger, 

Hitt, 

O'Donnell, 

Atkinson,  W.  Va. 

Culbertson,  Pa 

.  Kennedy, 

O'Neil,  Mass. 

Baker, 

Cutcheon, 

Kerr,  Iowa, 

O'Neill,  Pa. 

Banks, 

Dalzell, 

Ketcham, 

Osborne, 

Bayne, 

Dargan, 

Kinsey, 

Owen,  Ind. 

Beckwith, 

Darlington, 

Knapp, 

Payne, 

Belden, 

De  Lano, 

Lacey, 

Payson, 

Belknap, 

Dolliver, 

La  Follette, 

Perkins, 

Bergen, 

Bunnell, 

Laidlaw, 

Peters, 

Bingham, 

Dunphy, 

Laws, 

Pickler, 

Bliss, 

Evans, 

Lehlbach, 

Post, 

Boothman, 

Ewart, 

Lind, 

Pugsley, 

Boutelle, 

Farquhar, 

Lodge, 

Quinn, 

Bowden, 

Finley, 

Maish, 

Raines, 

Brewer, 

Fitch, 

McAdoo, 

Randall, 

Brosius, 

Flick, 

McComas, 

Reed,  Iowa, 

Browne,  Va 

Flood, 

McCormick, 

Reyburn, 

Buchanan,  N.  J. 

Frank, 

McKenna, 

Rife, 

Buckalew, 

Gear, 

McKinley, 

Rockwell, 

Burrows, 

Geisaenbainer 

Miles, 

Rowell, 

Burton, 

Geet, 

Milliken, 

RUS3*^11, 

Bntterworth, 

Giflford, 

Moffitt, 

Sanford, 

Caldwell, 

Greenhalge, 

Moore,  N.  H. 

Sawyer, 

Candler,  MafS. 

Grosvenor, 

Morey, 

Scull, 

Cannon, 

Hanfibrough, 

Morrill, 

Sherman, 

Caswell, 

Haugen, 

Morse, 

Smith,  111. 

Smith,  W.  Va. 

Smyser, 

Snider, 

Spooner, 

Stahlnecker, 

Stephenson, 

Stivers, 

Stockbridge, 

Struble, 

Sweney, 

Taylor,  E.  B. 

Taylor,  J.  D. 

Thomas, 

Tracey, 

Turner,  Kans. 

Vandever, 

Van  Schaick, 

Waddill, 

Walker,  Mass. 

Wallace,  Mass. 

Wallace,  N.  Y. 

Watson, 

Wickham, 

Wiley, 

Williams,  Ohio, 

Wilson,  Ky. 

Wright, 

Yardley. 


132 


NAYS— 117. 

•Abbott, 

Clarke,  Ala. 

Gibson, 

McClellan, 

Springer, 

Alderson, 

Clements, 

Goodnight,' 

McCreary, 

Stewart,  Ga. 

Anderson,  Miss. 

Clunie, 

Grimes, 

McMillin, 

Stewart,  Tex. 

Bankhead, 

Cobb, 

Hare, 

McRae, 

Stone,  Ky. 

Barnes, 

Connell, 

Hayes, 

Mills, 

Stone,  Mo. 

Bartine, 

Cooper,  Ind. 

Haynes, 

Montgomery, 

Stump, 

Blanchard, 

Cothran, 

Heard, 

Moore,  Tex. 

Tarsney, 

Bland, 

Cowles, 

Hemphill, 

Morrow, 

Tillman, 

Boatner, 

Crain, 

Henderson,N,C.Norton, 

Townsend,Colo. 

Breckinridge,Ark.  Crisp, 

Herbert, 

O'Neall,  Ind. 

Tucker, 

Breckinridge,  Ky. 

,  Culberson.Tex 

.  Hermann, 

Owens,  Ohio, 

Turner,  Ga. 

Brickner, 

Cummings, 

Holman, 

Parrett, 

Venable, 

Brookshire, 

Davidson, 

Kelley, 

Paynter, 

Wade, 

Brown,  J.  B. 

De  Haven, 

Kilgore, 

Peel, 

Wheeler,  Ala, 

Brunner, 

Dockery, 

Lane, 

Penington, 

Whiting, 

Buchanan,  Va. 

Edmunds, 

Lanham, 

Perry, 

Wike, 

Bullock, 

Elliott, 

L8e, 

Reilly, 

Wilkinson, 

Bunn, 

Ellis, 

Lester,  Ga. 

Richardson, 

Williams,  111. 

Bynum, 

Enloe, 

Lester,  Va. 

Robertson, 

Wilson,  Mo. 

Carlton, 

Fithian, 

Lewis, 

Rowland, 

Wilson,  W.Va. 

Carter, 

Forman, 

Magner, 

Sayers, 

Yoder. 

Caruth, 

Forney, 

Mansur, 

Shively, 

Catchings, 

Fowler, 

Martin,  Ind. 

Skinner, 

Chipman, 

Funston, 

McClammy, 

Spinola, 

So  the  appeal  was  laid  on  the  table.  , 

Thus  ended  the  struggle  in  the  House  over  the  free  coinage  bill 
which  had  passed  the  Senate  by  a  majority  of  17. 

The  Senate  Bill  Reported  to  the  House. 
The  Senate  bill  came  up  again  in  the  House  June  24th,  as  follows  : 

Mr.  McKINLEY.  I  am  instructed  by  the  Committee  on  Rules  to  make  the  fol- 
lowing report  and  ask  immediate  action  thereon. 

The  Clerk  read  as  follows  : 

The  Committee  on  Rules,  to  whom  was  referred  the  accompanying  resolution 
of  the  House  relating  to  a  time  for  the  consideration  of  House  bill  No.  5381  (the 
silver  bill),  have  considered  the  same,  and  beg  leave  to  report  the  following  sub- 
stitute : 

"Resolved.  That  immediately  after  the  passage  of  this  resolution  the  House  pro- 
ceed to  consider  House  bill  No.  5381  with  Senate  aoaendments,  and  at  2  o'clock 
Wednesday,  June  25,  1890,  the  previous  question  be  considered  as  ordered." 

Upon  this  the  previous  question  was  ordered,  twenty  minutes,  de- 
bate on  a  side  being  allowed.  A  few  extracts  from  this  debate  are 
here  given  : 

Mr.  McMILLIN.  Mr.  Speaker,  ray  colleague  and  I  on  the  committee  were  not 
able  to  concur  in  this  resolution  for  the  reason  that  we  thought  the  time  had  come 
when  there  ought  to  be  some  opportunity  of  unrestricted  consideration  of  a  meas- 
ure 60  important  as  the  silver  bill.  The  House  will  remember  that  when  it  was 
considered  before  it  was  under  a  special  rule,  which  took  it  out  of  the  Committee 
of  the  Whole,  which  limited  beforehand  the  time  when  debate  should  cease, 
which  limited  in  the  beginning  the  time  when  amendments  should  any  longer  be 
in  order,  and  which  had  the  effect,  whether  intended  or  not,  of  preventing  amend- 
ment. 

In  that  way  it  was  put  through  the  House.  It  was  passed  without  amendments 
or  without  opportunity  to  amend,  which  ought  to  be  the  right  of  the  House,  am 
went  to  the  Senate.    It  is  disclosing  no  secret  to  say  that  gentlemen  who  vote( 


133 

for  it  did  so  under  protest ;  did  so,  stating;  to  the  House  that  they  would  not  sup- 
port it  but  for  the  fact  that  the  Senate  would  have  a  chance  for  deliberate  consider- 
ation and  amendment. 

It  went  to  the  Senate  ;  it  was  amended  there  ;  it  came  back  to  this  House,  and 
the  proceedings  by  which  it  was  referred  to  the  Committee  on  Coinage,  Weights 
and  Measures  is  a  part  of  the  history  of  this  House.  That  committee,  I  under- 
stand, have  reported  it  back  this  morning.  Now,  before  even  their  report  is 
printed,  before  it  has  been  read,  before  it  has  been  considered  for  one  moment,  it 
is  proposed  to  apply  a  new  iron-bound  rule,  and  to  again  cut  ofl  the  right  of 
amendment,  and  to  again  cut  off  the  right  of  debate. 

Mr.  BLAND.  A  parliamentary  inquiry,  Mr.  Speaker.  Do  I  understand,  under 
this  rule,  that  the  vote  to  be  taken  to-morrow,  in  the  regular  order,  would  be,  first, 
to  concur  in  the  Senate  amendments,  and  then  to  non-concur  and  aak  for  a  com- 
mittee of  conference  ?  If  I  understand  the  parliamentary  situation,  that  is  the 
way  ;  and  that  is  what  I  desire  to  know. 

The  SPEAKER.  That  will  be  the  case.  Provided  a  motion  to  concur  should 
be  made,  that  would  have  precedence ;  but  that  might  be  open  to  amendment. 

Mr.  BLAND.  I  want  to  give  notice  tbati  desire  to  move  to  concur  in  the  Senate 
amendments. 

So  far  as  I  am  concerned,  Mr.  Speaker,  the  bill  as  amended  by  the  Senate  is  en- 
tirely satisfactory  to  me,  and  I  am  ready  to  vote  upon  it  to-day  or  to  morrow,  when- 
ever the  House  sees  proper. 

Mr.  BLOUNT.  Mr.  Speaker,  so  far  as  I  am  concerned  the  only  difficulty  we  have 
about  this  matter  is  a  right  which  I  think  has  been  restricted  without  reason  on 
several  occasions — the  right  of  considering  Senate  amendments,  which,  under  the 
rules  have  to  go  to  the  Committee  of  the  Whole — the  right  to  exercise  that  priv- 
ilege. 

Now,  it  is  well  known,  sir,  that  only  a  few  days  ago,  on  this  very  silver  bill,  there 
was  a  restraint  on  the  part  of  the  majority  of  this  House  by  reason  of  an  order 
made  and  agreed  to  in  advance  of  debate.  There  was  a  restraint  on  the  rights  of 
the  majority  of  this  House  to  do  what  it  wanted  to  do  There  were  three  days  af- 
terwards wasted  on  a  parliamentary  question,  fought  with  intense  eamestnees,  be- 
cause the  majority  of  this  House  believed  it  had  been  wronged  on  this  question. 
******* 

In  the  debate  on  the  silver  bill  previously  had,  the  gentleman  from  Illinois  [Mr. 
Cannon]  and  the  gentleman  from  Ohio  [Mr.  McKinley],  when  I  stated  that  there 
would  be  no  ri^ht  to  vote  on  the  question  of  free  coinage,  that  there  would  be  four 
amendments  offered,  all  coming  from  the  other  side  and  all  following  one  line  of 
thought,  responded  :  "  Why,  you  have  all  the  rights  you  have  under  the  rules  of 
the  House."  Well  we  did  have  all  the  rights  we  had  under  the  rules  of  the  House 
as  the  rules  were  administered,  and  when  we  had  it,  with  all  its  seeming  fairness, 
with  all  the  demand  there  was  for  the  free  coinage  of  silver  in  this  country,  we 
never  had  an  opportunity  to  vote  upon  free  coinage.  The  digciplinary  process  has 
been  steadilj'  going  on  in  Republican  caucuses,  in  Republican  councils,  and  in  the 
Republican  Committee  on  Rules,  to  prevent  such  a  vote. 

Mr.  McKINLEY.  Mr.  Speaker,  the  purpose  of  this  resolution  must  be  manifest 
to  both  sides  of  the  Chamber.  It  is  that  we  may  have  some  definite  and  speedy 
action  touching  the  subject  of  silver,  and  give  to  the  country  a  larger  use  of  silver 
as  a  circulating  medium  and  do  it  at  once,  and  I  am  very  much  surprised  to  find 
gentlemen  on  the  other  side  of  the  House  to-day  engaged  in  opposition  to  this  bill 
who,  three  or  four  days  ago,  were  insisting  that  this  question  should  not  go  to  the 
Committee  of  the  Whole  on  the  state  of  the  Union,  but  should  be  considered  im- 
mediately in  open  House,  because,  as  ibey  said,  they  and  the  country  were  ready 
to  vote  upon  it.  They  said  in  that  debate,  Mr.  Speaker,  that  the  purpose  of  this 
side  of  the  House  was  to  smother  the  silver  bill,  to  send  it  to  the  Committee  on 
Coinage,  Weights  and  Measures,  where  it  would  sleep  during  the  remainder  of  this 
session,  and  that  we  should  have  no  silver  legislation  at  all. 

Mr.  Speaker,  if  It  is  practical  legislation  we  are  after — if  it  is  the  desire  to  coin 
every  dollar  of  the  silver  product  of  the  United  States,  and  make  the  Treasury 
notes  issued  in  payment  for  that  bullion  a  legal  tender  for  debts,  pubUc  and  pri- 
vate, redeemable  in  coin — if  that  is  what  the  people  of  this  coimtry  want,  they 
can  have  it  by  a  vote  concurring  in  the  recommendation  of  the  Committee  on 
Coinage,  Weights  and  Measures  to  non-concur  in  the  Senate  amendments  and 
have  a  committee  of  conference. 


134 

We  are  confronted  face  to  face  with  the  practical  question  whether  we  shall 
have  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  the  world's  silver  product,  before  any  inter- 
national arrangement  for  the  monetary  use  of  silver  is  made,  or  whether  we  shall 
have  legislation  that  will  absorb  every  ounce  of  silver  produced  in  the  United 
States  and  make  it  a  part  of  our  monetary  system,  and  accepsible  to  the  business 
uses  of  the  country,  and  yet  not  interfere  with  future  international  arrangements. 
That,  Mr.  Speaker,  is  what  is  involved  in  the  report  this  morning. 

The  rule  was  adopted,  and  Mr.  Conger,  chairman  of  the  commit- 
tee having  charge  of  the  hill,  submitted  the  report  of  the  committee 
on  the  bill,  which  is  as  follows : 

The  Committee  on  Coinage,  Weights  and  Measures,  to  whom  was  referred  House 
bill  No.  5381,  directing  the  purchase  of  silver  bullion  and  the  issue  of  Trraf^ury 
notes  thereon,  and  for  other  purposes,  with  various  Senate  amendments,  having 
given  the  same  due  consideration,  report  the  same  back  to  theHouse  with  a  recom- 
mendation that  the  House  non-concur  in  each  and  all  of  said  amendments  and  re- 
quest a  conference  on  the  same. 

Thus,  the  bill  which  the  chairman  of  the  House  Coinage  Commit- 
tee said  had  not  been  duly  considered  by  the  Senate,  was  immediately 
reported  back  as  having  had  "due  consideration  "  at  the  hands  of 
the  Committee  on  Coinage,  Weights  and  Measures,  the  result  of 
which  was  the  predetermined  recommendation  that  the  bill  be  sent  to 
a  conference  committee  1    On  reporting  back  the  bill,  Mr.  Conger  said  • 

Now,  Mr.  Speaker,  I  move  that  the  House  non-concur  in  the  Senate  amend- 
ments and  request  a  conference.    I  desire  to  say,  Mr.  Speaker 

Mr.  BLAND.  I  desire  to  move  to  concur  with  the  Senate  amendments.  I  wish 
to  have  that  motion  pending. 

The  SPEAKER.  The  gentleman  from  Iowa  [Mr.  Congee]  moves  that  the 
House  non-concur  in  the  Senate  amendments  and  ask  for  a  committee  of  confer- 
ence. Pending  that  the  gentleman  from  Missouri  [Mr.  Bland]  moves  that  the 
House  concur  in  the  Senate  amendments. 

Mr.  McMILLIN.  I  presume  we  shall  be  entitled  to  a  division  of  the  question. 
There  are  a  number  of  amendments. 

The  SPEAKER.  The  amendments  will  have  to  be  voted  on  separately,  if  de- 
manded. 

Mr.  BLOUNT.    They  are  all  pending? 

The  SPEAKER.    They  are  all  pending. 

Mr.  BLOUNT.    So  that  we  shall  get  a  vote  on  both  questions. 

The  SPEAKER.    If  the  motion  to  concur  is  negatived 

Mr.  BLOUNT.    That  is  the  first  vote  ? 

The  SPEAKER.  If  that  motion  is  negatived  it  is  equivalent  to  a  vote  to  non-concur. 

Mr.  BLOUNT.    That  will  be  the  first  question  submitted  ? 

The  SPEAKER.  That  will  be  the  first  question  submitted — the  question  on 
concurrence. 

Mr.  SPRINGER.    That  will  be  at  2  o'clock  to-morrow. 

Mr.  McCREARY.  I  rise  to  a  parliamentary  inquiry.  Does  the  motion  to  con- 
cur apply  to  all  the  Senate  amendments  on  the  first  vote? 

The  SPEAKER.  The  motion  covers  all  the  amendments,  but  any  member  will 
have  the  ri^ht  to  demand  a  separate  vote. 

Mr.  CONGER.  Mr.  Speaker,  I  came  to  the  beginning  of  this  Congress  fully  im- 
pressed with  the  necessity  of  some  legislation  upon  this  important  question  which 
we  have  under  discussion  before  us  to-day,  and  I  believe  I  can  safely  speak  for  a 
majority  of  the  members  of  this  side  of  the  House  when  I  say  that  they  came 
here  fully  impressed  with  the  same  spirit  and  belief.  To  that  end  the  committee 
over  which  I  have  the  honor  to  preside  have  continually  and  patiently  labored. 

We  gave  to  the  matter  before  any  report  was  made  to  the  House  the  fullest  pos- 
sible consideration.  We  listened  to  the  statements  and  arguments  of  every  mem- 
ber and  of  every  man  who  desired  to  appear  before  the  committee.  We  had  first 
before  us  a  committee  representing  the  National  Silver  Convention  that  met  in  St. 
Louis  last  fall.    General  A.  J.  Warner,  of  Ohio,  came  here  to  represent  and  speak 


135 

for  that  convention,  and  he  came  with  full  authority  as  expressing  the  wishes  and 
the  views  of  the  convention.  We  listened  to  Mr.  Warner,  we  took  his  suggestions, 
and  we  found  that  upon  the  date  of  his  appearance  before  our  committee  he  was 
practically  in  accord  with  the  bill  which  was  afterwards  reported  by  that  committee 
and  placed  upon  the  Calendar  of  this  Houee.  He  indorsed  and  advocated  the  com- 
mercial instead  of  the  coining  ratio  between  gold  and  silver,  and  also  the  princi- 
ple of  bullion  redemption,  which  are  the  main  features  of  the  House  bill.  And  I 
understand,  Mr.  Speaker,  if  he  does  not  still  believe  in  the  principles  which  were 
acted  upon  by  the  committee  in  the  adoption  of  that  bill,  there  certainly  has  come  a 
great  change  over  the  spirit  of  his  dream,  as  well  as  that  of  the  great  crowd  of 
silver  men  for  whom  he  spoke. 

Now,  Mr.  Speaker,  following  in  that  line  we  reported  that  bill  to  the  House. 
We  reported  a  bill  which  we  believed  was  for  the  beet  interests  of  the  whole  peo- 
ple of  this  country — not  simply  for  the  bullion  owners,  not  simply  for  the  holders 
of  capital,  but  for  the  interest  of  every  man,  woman,  and  child  in  this  country,  for 
there  is  nothing  upon  which  the  prosperity  of  a  community  or  a  country  depends 
so  much  as  upon  safe  and  judicious  financial  legislation.  For  that  reason,  and  eo 
believing,  while  we  were  all  in  favor  of  the  additional  and  enlarged  use  of  silver  as 
money  in  this  country,  we  tried  to  find  some  method  in  which  that  enlargement 
and  that  additional  use  could  come  about  without  creating  great  or  disastrous  fi- 
nancial disturbance.  We  believed  we  had  arrived  at  a  proper  and  safe  conclusion 
in  that  respect  when  we  reported  the  House  bill,  and  have  seen  nothing  to  change 
that  conviction.    We  still  believe  it. 

I  speak  for  myself  when  I  say  that  the  action  of  the  United  States  Senate  has 
not  changed  my  views  upon  this  question  in  the  least.  Why,  Mr.  Speaker,  the 
Senators  did  not  discuss  the  bill  that  they  sent  over  to  us,  and  they  do  not  want 
the  bill  passed.  Many  of  them  are  ashamed  of  the  legislation  which  they  enacted 
and  sent  over  here,  and  they  have  acknowledged  it. 

The  silver  committee  can  not  speak  for  the  Senate,  or  for  Senators, 

but  comparing  the  discussion  on  the  subject  In  the  two  Houses  no  one 

would  likely  be  led  into  the  belief  that  all  the  knowledgeon  the  subject 

was  confined  to  the  House,  and  certainly  not  to  the  chairman  of  the 

Coinage  Committee.     As  to  what  the  chairman  of  the  National  Silver 

Committee  advised  it  would  have  been  fairer  to  him  to  have  given 

from  the  record  just  what  he  did  say.     The  following  is  taken  from 

the  report  of  the  Committee  on  Coinage,  Weights  and  Measures  to 

the  House,  January  27,  1890,  containing  arguments  and  evidence 

before  the  committee : 

The  Chairman.  Let  me  ask  just  one  question,  Mr.  Warner.  I  want  to  know — 
jou,  of  course,  have  read  the  bill  prepared  by  the  Secretary  ? 

Mr.  Warner.    I  have. 

The  Chairman.  In  j  our  judgment,  will  the  passage  of  that  bill  furnish  the  re- 
lief sought,  and  if  not  entireh ,  in  a  very  large  measure? 

Mr.  Warner.  So  far  as  the  bill  follows  the  principle  evidently  had  in  view  in 
its  preparation,  it  would,  unquestionably  ;  but  in  some  of  its  sections,  it  seems  to 
me,  it  so  far  departs  from  the  principle  on  which  it  is  based  as  to  make  its  opera- 
tion very  uncertain.  The  primary  principle  of  the  bill  I  conceive  to  be  perfectly 
sound.  Bimetallism  is  the  unlimited  use  of  gold  and  silver  for  money.  But  it 
is  not  necessary  thaX  the  ratio  between  the  two  metals  be  16  to  1  or  15}  to  1,  nor 
is  it  abtolutely  necessary  (although  much  better)  to  have  any  fixed  ratio  at  all. 
The  essential  thing  is  that  the  two  metals  shall  be  open  to  monetary  use  without 
limit    That,  I  say,  is  bimetallism. 

Now,  if  the  doors  of  the  Treasury  are  open  to  the  reception  of  all  the  silver  that 
is  offered,  and  all  the  gold  that  is  offered,  at  a  ratio  determined  by  the  market 
price  on  that  day  or  any  day,  that  is  bimetallism,  whatever  the  ratio  may  be.  The 
ratio  may  be  the  commercial  ratio  as  well  as  16  to  1.  I  can  not  come  to  any  other 
conclusion.    That  being  the  case,  so  long  as  that  principle  is  adhered  to  the  oper- 


136 

ation  of  the  bill  would  be  this  :  Suppose,  for  instance,  the  average  price  of  silver 
yesterday  in  New  York  was  98  cents  an  ounce,  and  that  the  Secretary  takes  that 
as  the  Treasury  price  for  to-day — for  the  Secretary  does  not  make  the  price ;  he 
simply  determines  the  price  which  the  buying  and  selling  of  the  world  makes.  It 
is  clear  that  silver  would  not  fall  below  that  price,  for  there  is  a  buyer  for  all  that  is 
offered,  at  the  price  stated.  The  price  will  rest  there  and  can  not  fall.  It  may 
rise,  and  the  tendency  would  be  to  rise,  because  the  silver  that  goes  into  the  Treas- 
ury is  \\ithdrawn  from  the  markets  of  the  world.  The  supply  is  lessened  by  so 
much  ;  at  the  same  time  it  is  monetized  through  certificates — or  would  be  if  the 
primary  principle  of  the  bill  is  carried  out  all  the  way.  In  short,  by  one  and  the 
same  act,  the  silver  would  be  withdrawn  from  the  market,  and  the  money  volume 
would  be  increased  by  the  certificates  put  out.  In  other  words,  the  silver  would 
be  monetized. 

The  Chairman.  The  effect  of  the  passage  of  this  bill,  in  your  judgment,  would 
be  the  same  practically  as  free  coinage  ? 

Mr.  Warner.  It  would  be  bimetallism,  but  not  quite  free  coinage.  I  will  come 
to  that  in  a  moment.  The  first  effect  of  the  bill  will  be  to  stop  the  fall  of  silver. 
That  is,  if  the  principle  of  bimetallism  is  strictly  adhered  to.  If  silver  rises,  as 
doubtless  it  will,  then  immediately  the  advanced  price  becomes  the  Treasury  price, 
and  it  would  not  fall  below  that,  but  would  undoubtedly  rise  again.  It  would  rise, 
too,  the  world  over ;  not  only  in  New  York,  but  in  London  and  everywhere  elee,. 
and  the  idea  of  the  bill,  as  1  understand  it,  is  to  follow  the  ratio  which  the  trade 
of  the  world  makes,  at  the  same  time  operating  as  a  ratchet  to  prevent  a  fall.  It 
can  not  be  otherwise  than  perfectly  safe  for  any  nation,  no  matter  how  limited  its 
trade,  to  adopt  that  principle. 

The  Chairman.  I  want  to  give  the  committee  an  opportunity  to  make  some  in- 
quiries, if  the  members  of  the  committee  desire  to  do  so. 

Mr.  Warner.  If  you  will  pardon  me  a  moment  till  I  refer  to  two  or  three  points 
in  which  this  bill,  as  it  seems  to  me,  so  far  departs  from  the  principle  I  have  stated 
as  to  practically  nullify  the  principle,  and  leave  the  bill  open  to  the  charge  that 
under  it  silver  bullion  is  made  a  mere  commodity,  to  fluctuate  like  anything  else. 
Certificates  when  issued,  I  think,  instead  of  being  redeemable  of  right  in  bullion 
should  be  redeemable,  as  every  other  kind  of  paper  is,  in  coin  or  lawful  money. 
The  Secretary,  of  course,  has  always  the  option  of  redeeming  paper  in  gold  coin  or 
silver  coin,  but  it  should  be  like  any  other  paper,  redeemable  in  coin  (or  in  law- 
ful money)  and  not  primarily,  or  as  of  right,  in  silver  bullion. 

Now,  if  you  will  look  at  the  fourth  section,  you  will  see  that  the  notes  are  to  be 
redeemed  on  presentation  at  the  Treasury  of  the  United  States  or  at  the  office  of 
the  Assistant  Treasurer.  How  ?  By  the  issue  of  a  certificate  of  deposit  for  a  sum 
equal  to  the  value  of  the  bullion  at  that  date.  That  is,  the  note,  or  money  certifi- 
cate, is  redeemable  in  a  certificate  of  deposit.  Then  how  is  the  certificate  of  deposit 
to  be  redeemed?  Why,  primarily  and  of  right  in  silver  bullion.  The  holder, 
however,  may  have  it  redeemed  in  silver  coin,  or  the  Secretary  may  redeem  it  in 
gold ;  but  primarily  the  certificates  are  redeemable  in  bullion. 

Now  the  other  objectionable  provision  is  this:  the  discretionary  power  given  to 
the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury.  If  you  restore  silver  to  unlimited  use  as  money, 
which  this  bill,  following  its  fundamental  principle,  virtually  does,  then  you  have 
submitted  the  regulation  of  the  money  volume  to  the  production  of  the  mines. 
That  is,  to  natural  regulation,  where  it  always  ought  to  rest.  Now,  to  intrust  to 
one  man  the  power  to  change  it  from  natural  regulation  to  personal  regulation,  lo 
the  will  or  judgment  of  one  man,  would  be  to  trust  him  with  the  exercise  of  a 
power  that  no  man  on  earth  ever  held  in  any  age  of  the  world,  and  never  ought 
to  hold.  The  very  object  of  the  bill  is  to  relegate  the  supply  and  control  of  money 
to  natural  causes ;  and  to  let  the  principle  of  automatic  regulation  operate  or  not 
as  one  man  may  decide,  is  to  set  aside  the  reason  for  having^  metallic  money  at 
all.  In  my  judgment  no  such  power  should  be  lodged  with  any  officer  of  the 
Government. 

Mr.  Wilcox.  Is  that  the  only  objection  to  the  bill? 

Mr.  Warner.  These  two  provisions  are  the  ones  chiefly'objectionable.  I  think, 
however,  provision  ought  to  be  made  for  free  coinage,  or  unlimited  certificates, 
when  the  ratio  of  16  to  1  is  reached,  as  it  certainly  would  be  under  this  bill. 

Mr.  Williams.  Without  these  objections  in  the  bill  you  speak  of,  do  you  think 
the  bill  would  put  silver  on  an  equality  with  gold  ? 


137 

Mr.  Warner.    In  not  a  very  long  time.    Undoubtedly  it  would  have  that  effect. 

Mr.  Williams.     Gold  is  still  a  single  standard. 

Mr.  Warnkr.  Strictly  speaking,  I  suppose  no  country  in  the  world  has  a  purely 
gold  standard  or  gold  measure.  In  the  United  States  we  say  we  have  the  gold 
standard,  and  yet  the  gold  is  diluted,  so  to  speak,  by  $350,000,000  of  silver  and  quite 
a  large  amount  of  paper.  In  England  their  gold  is  diluted  with  somf  $200,000,000 
of  paper,  and  eo  in  every  other  country.  Our  whole  currency  is  kept  at  the  level 
of  gold,  but  the  gold  does  not  constitute  the  same  standard  it  would  if  all  the  other 
kinds  of  money  were  destroyed.  Suppose  our  money  volume  consisted  of  the 
$700,000,000  of  gold  only,  with  no  paper  or  silver,  the  gold  in  that  case  would  have 
a  very  different  value  from  what  it  now  has  with  silver  and  paper  circulating  with 
it  as  part  of  our  money,  and  would  constitute  in  that  case  a  very  different  standard. 
It  would  be  the  same  in  England  or  any  other  gold-standard  country.  Now,  if  you 
add  more  silver  to  our  currency  you  make  the  color  of  the  whole,  so  to  speak,  a 
little  whiter;  you  do  not  necessarily  depart  from  the  gold  level,  but  the  gold  level 
is  not,  however,  exactly  the  same.  In  other  words,  gold  is  itself  modified  by  addi- 
tions of  other  money.  The  idea  that  gold  constitutes  an  unalterable  standard  ia 
an  error  which  probably  contributed  more  to  the  mischief  of  demonetization  than 
any  thing  else.  It  was  assumed  that  gold  possessed  a  fixed  value,  and  never 
changed. 

The  difference  between  opening  the  mints  to  all  silver  at  the  mar- 
ket or  commercial  ratio,  and  the  purchase  of  a  given  number  of 
ounces  a  month  which  may  go  back  again  as  bullion,  ought  to  be 
apparent  enough  to  any  one.  In  the  one  case,  all  silver  is  "mone- 
tized, silver  metal  is  made  a  money  metal  as  in  free  coinage — not  at 
a  fixed  ratio  to  gold,  it  is  true,  but  at  the  market  ratio  existing  at 
the  time. 

In  the  other  case  a  certain  amount  of  silver  is  purchased  for  mone- 
tary use,  but  may  be  reconverted  into  bullion  to  be  sold  as  a  com- 
modity, and  the  money  volume  reduced  by  so  much.  In  the  case 
where  a^Z  silver  is  made  money  material,  if  bullion  were  paid  out  by  the 
Treasury  it  might  go  again  the  next  day  to  the  Treasury  as  money,  the 
same  as  gold  or  silver  under  free  coinage.  Gold  coins  may  be  melted 
into  bullion,  but  the  gold  does  not  thereby  lose  its  right  to  be  money 
or  its  potential  money  power  ;  so  it  would  be  with  silver  under  free 
coinage,  or  under  a  law  where  anybody  at  any  time  could  deposit  it 
for  money  certificates  at  its  market  ratio.  But  under  the  committee 
bill,  permitting  bullion  redemption,  only  a  given  quantity  of  silver 
would  be  purchased  and  that  could  be  sent  back  to  the  bullion  pile 
at  any  time  through  the  redemption  of  certificates. 

The  National  Silver  Committee  persistently  and  unwaveringly  in- 
sisted that  whatever  silver  was  converted  into  money — was  monetized — 
should  stay  money. 

Mr.  Conger  was  still  weighed  down  with  the  absurd  notion 
that  free  coinage  would  enable  one  depositing  silver  to  put  in  §100 
and  take  out  $130.  Just  how  this  was  to  be  done  neither  he  nor  the 
other  members  of  the  committee  who  shared  his  .opinions  on  this 
point,  undertook  to  explain. 


138 

This  is  what  Mr.  Conger  again  said  on  this  point : 

But  what  does  the  Senate  do  with  the  first  section  of  their  bill?  They  simply 
come  at  once  to  the  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  silver.  They  open  our  mints, 
not  only  to  the  production  of  our  own  silver  mines,  but  open  them  freely  to  -the 
production  of  the  silver  mines  of  all  the  world,  if  it  should  come  here  to  be  coined. 
This  means — and  I  tell  you  gentlemen,  the  people  of  this  country  who  are  clamor- 
ing for  free  coinage  do  not  understand  the  full  import  of  immediate  free  coinage — 
this  means  that  the  man  who  has  $100  worth  of  bullion  can  bring  it  to  the  mints 
of  the  United  States  and  get  $130  for  it,  walking  away  with  $30  profit  on  each  $100. 
Why,  it  means  a  profit  to  the  bullion  owners  of  this  country  in  a  single  year  of 
$13,000,000.  Are  you  ready,  gentlemen,  to  put  this  burden,  this  tax  upon  the  con- 
stituency which  you  represent  on  this  floor?  I,  for  one,  am  not  at  this  present 
moment. 

This  absurd  idea  was  held  not  only  by  Mr.  Conger  but  seemed  to 
dominate  many  others. 

It  may  not  even  yet  have  dawned  upon  Mr.  Conger  that  under  free 
coinage  there  could  be  no  difference  between  an  ounce  or  a  pound  of 
silver  in  bars  and  in  coins.  If  everybody  having  silver  in  bars  could 
have  it  stamped  into  coin  for  nothing,  how  could  there  be  a  difference 
in  the  value  of  the  silver  in  the  one  form  or  the  other  ?  Under  free 
coinage  all  silver  is  monetized  and  becomes  potentially  money  no  matter 
what  form  it  is  in.  Coinage  in  that  case  is  merely  a  certification  of 
weight  and  fineness. 

Mr.  Conger  seemed  astonished  that  Senators  had  not  taken  into 
account  a  reason  so  conclusive  to  him  against  free  coinage.  One 
would  have  supposed  that  Mr.  Conger  would  have  tried  to  enlighten 
such  novices  in  the  study  of  economics  as  Senator  Jones,  of  Nevada, 
and  others  of  the  Senate,  on  a  question  of  such  vast  importance  1 

Mr.  Conger  complained,  too,  of  lobbyists.  No  one  ever  heard,  how- 
ever, of  his  complaining  of  gold  lobbyists,  or  National  Bank  lobby- 
ists, and  nobody  but  Mr.  Conger  and  Mr.  Taylor,  of  his  committee, 
seem  to  have  been  troubled  by  "silver  lobbyists."  But  if  Mr.  Conger, 
and  some  others  of  the  House,  had  invited  some  "  lobbyist,"  or  some 
one  else,  to  give  them  a  little  elementary  instruction  on  the  subject, 
they  might  have  appeared  to  much  better  advantage  to  themselves  in 
what  they  had  to  say  on  the  question  in  the  House.  They  might,  at 
least,  have  learned  that  when  coinage  is  free  and  unlimited  all  silver, 
the  metal  itself,  is  monetized — is  potentially  money,  just  as  all  gold 
now  is — and  that  under  such  conditions  there  could  be  no  difference 
between  the  value  of  a  given  weight  of  silver  in  the  shape  of  bars 
or  in  the  shape  of  coins,  unless  it  be  a  trifling  charge  to  take  the 
bars  to  the  mints.  To  claim,  therefore,  a  permanent  profit  to  de- 
positors of  silver  under  free  coinage  simply  exposes  an  inexcusable 
ignorance  of  the  •simplest  principles  on  which  metallic  money  rests. 


139 


Mr,  Bland,  replying  to  Mr.  Conger,  said : 


The  gentleman  from  Iowa  [Mr.  Congee]  assumed  that  the  great  pressure  for  free 
coinage  in  this  country  comes  only  from  the  owners  of  silver  mines,  and  he  has 
alluded  to  the  St.  Louis  convention  and  the  efforts  there  made  to  educate  the 
minds  of  the  people  of  this  country  upon  the  silver  question.  As  for  the  lobby 
of  which  he  speaks,  I  know  nothing  about  it.  I  have  not  seen  it  myself  and  I 
have  never  heard  of  it  unless  he  applies  that  term  to  gentlemen  who  have  printed 
documents  on  this  subject,  who  have  addressed  the  Committee  on  Coina2;e, 
Weights  and  Measures  upon  the  subject,  and  who  have  adopted  every  means  within 
their  power  to  give  us  information  upon  this  very  important  question.  In  that 
way  and  to  that  extent  I  suppose  weare  always  beset  by  "  lobbyists."  Indeed,  in 
that  sense  we  might  be  called  lobbyists  ourselves — if  such  a  term  could  be  ap- 
plied to  gentlemen  upon  this  floor — because  it  is  our  duty  to  give  each  other  all 
the  information  that  we  have  upon  subjects  of  legislation  and  to  obtain  informa- 
tion from  all  legitimate  quarters. 

My  friend  [Mr.  Conger!  has  also  alluded  to  a  silver  "  pool "  and  silver  specula- 
tion. Mr,  Speaker,  there  is  but  one  way  to  prevent  speculation  in  silver  bullion, 
the  same  sort  of  speculation  that  you  have  in  wheat,  the  same  sort  of  speculation 
that  you  have  in  corn,  the  same  sort  of  speculation  that  you  have  in  iron  and 
steel  and  in  other  products.  There  is,  I  eay,  but  one  way  to  prevent  it,  and  that 
is  to  give  it  an  unlimited  coinage  at  the  mints  of  this  country.  In  that  way  you 
establish  for  silver,  as  you  have  established  for  gold,  a  price  as  money  which  will 
always  fix  the  value  of  the  bullion  at  the  mints,  and  beyond  that  price  it  can  not 
go  unless  other  countries  should  desire  to  pay  a  higher  price  for  it.  Any  legisla- 
tion that  restricts  the  coinage  of  silver  offers  an  opportunity  for  speculation,  and 
that  was  the  difficulty  with  the  legislation  of  1878,  to  which  my  colleague,  the 
chairman  of  the  committee,  has  referred.  At  that  time  it  was  contended  that 
silver  was  depreciated,  and  that  therefore  it  ought  not  to  *have  the  privileges  of 
the  mints  of  this  Government. 

******* 

There  is  no  question  in  my  mind  that  had  the  Congress  of  the  United  States 
at  that  time  done  its  duty  with  regard  to  this  subject  and  opened  the  mints  to  the 
unlimited  coinage  of  silver  it  would  have  settled  the  silver  question,  and  settled 
it  satisfactorily  to  the  people  of  this  country,  and  we  would  have  no  such  question 
to  deal  with  to-day.  But  gentlemen  contended  then,  as  they  contend  now,  that 
gold  was  the  only  proper  measure  of  value,  that  gold  was  the  only  safe  coin,  that 
gold  was  to  dominate  the  silver  question,  and  that  silver  as  a  standard  of  value 
should  play  no  part  in  our  coinage  system  or  in  our  currency  system.  First  it  was 
resolved  that  gold  and  gold  alone  was  the  dollar,  the  measure  of  value,  and  be- 
cause silver  bullion  after  having  been  denied  the  privilege  of  free  coinage,  is  not 
worth  as  much  as  gold  which  has  that  privilege,  for  that  reason  it  is  contended 
that  silver  ought  not  to  be  coined,  but  should  be  left  to  be  a  mere  object  of  sppcula- 
tion.  What  has  been  the  consequence?  Gentlemen  who  live  in  the  great  North- 
western and  Western  States  have  been  the  sufferers. 

******** 

Now,  I  propose,  Mr.  Speaker,  to  have  read  a  letter  that  I  received  two  or  three 
days  ago,  if  the  clerk  will  do  me  the  kindness,  to  show  that  the  agricultural  people 
of  this  country  fully  and  completely  understand  this  subject,  and  to  show,  also,  to 
my  friend  from  Iowa  that  there  are  lobbyists  in  the  interest  of  free  coinage  of  sil- 
ver even  out  as  far  as  upon  the  prairies  of  Nebraska.    I  ask  the  clerk  to  read. 

The  clerk  read  as  follows : 

"Nebraska  State  Farmer.s'  Alliance, 
"President's  Office,  Cornell,  Nebr.,  Jane  19,  1890. 

"  Dear  Sir  :  Seeing  by  the  papers  that  a  conference  on  the  silver  bill  has  been 
called,  I  take  the  liberty  to  address  you  to  let  you  know  that  the  farmers  of  Ne- 
braska are  not  careless  spectators  of  the  struggle  for  free  coinage  of  silver. 

We  feel  that  although  the  House  bill  presents  a  little  temporary  relief  there 
should  be  no  temporizing  or  compromise.    But  I  believe  the  farmers  and  work- 


140 

ing  people  generally  of  the  country  demand  a  larger  increase  of  money,  and  that 
there  is  less  prejudice  and  objection  to  the  increase  by  the  free  coinage  of  silver 
than  by  any  other  way. 

"  We  would  urge  you  then,  most  respectfally,  to  stand  by  the  principle,  and  if  it 
is  defeated  we  will  use  our  best  efforts  to  bring  its  enemies  before  the  bar  of  the 
country  for  sentence  and  condemnation. 

"  Yours,  with  respect,  "J.  H.  POWERS, 

"President  Nebraska  State  Fanners'  Alliance." 
"Hon.  R.  P.  Bland." 

Mr.  POST  said :  Mr.  Speaker,  the  real  question  before  this  House  is  whether 
silver  shall  be  recognized  as  a  money  metal.  I  listened  with  great  attention  to 
the  opening  speech  of  the  chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Coinage,  Weights  and 
Measures  [Mr.  Conger],  and  a  gentleman  at  my  side  said  it  was  an  excellent 
speech.  I  said  it  was,  indeed,  a  splendid  argument  from  a  gold-standard  point  of 
view.  _  And  striking  out  that  single  gold-standard  point  of  view  you  will  find  that 
there  is  nothing  whatever  in  the  argument.  Unless  we  are  willing  to  recognize 
silver  as  a  money  metal  we  might  as  well,  as  some  have  said,  increase  the  currency 
by  a  paper  money.    That  is  the  real  question. 

And  now,  Mr.  Speaker,  I  want  to  refer  to  one  other  matter  mentioned  by  the 
chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Coinage,  Weights  and  Measures,  and  that  is  to  the 
silver  lobby,  the  lobby  representing  the  silver  miners  that  is  supposed  to  be  about 
this  Capitol.  I  want  to  say  that  I  know  nothing  of  them,  I  have  heard  nothing 
of  them,  have  seen  nothing  of  them.  There  are  no  silver  mines  in  my  district.  I 
never  had  any  interest  in  silver  bullion  and  have  no  interest  in  silver  in  any  form, 
except  the  few  coins  which  happen  to  be  in  my  pocket.  To  state  my  connection 
with  this  proposition  whether  gold  and  silver  shall  be  used  as  money,  I  will  say 
that  it  commenced  back  in  1868,  when  the  discussion  went  on  in  Europe  that  if  it 
were  possible  to  induce  the  principal  commercial  nations  of  the  world  to  use  gold 
alone  as  their  standard,  the  immediate  result  would  be  to  increase  the  value  of 
gold  38J  per  cent. 

I  put  that  statement  in  the  speech  which  I  made  some  days  ago  on  this  ques- 
tion, and  I  have  expected  that  possibly  it  would  be  controverted.  I  have  not 
seen  it  controverted,  and  I  know  that  right  here  in  the  library  are  documents  by 
which  I  can  prove  every  word  of  it.  It  was  then  pointetl  out  that  it  would  be  a 
disadvaiitage  to  the  producer  and  to  the  advantage  of  the  fund-holder.  I  took  my 
stand  with  the  producer  and  against  the  fund-holder  at  that  time.  I  was  abso- 
amazed  when  I  found  that  the  United  States  in  1873  had  fallen  into  the  trap  which 
England  had  laid  for  it,  and  1  think  this  Government  was  not  aware  of  the  change, 
for  in  truth  and  effect  the  officers  of  the  Treasury  did  not  seem  to  find  out  that 
silver  had  been  demonetized  and  the  single  gold  standard  adopted  for  nearly  a 
year  afterward.  They  continued  silver  all  the  while  during  that  time  as  the 
standard  of  these  United  States.  And  let  me  say  right  here,  when  people  are 
talking  about  their  fear  of  what  will  happen  when  silver  comes  into  use  in  this 
way  by  its  free  coinage,  that  we  had  free  coinage  of  silver  from  the  commence- 
ment of  this  Government  down  to  1873.  We  had  more  than  that;  we  had  the 
single  silver  standard,  and  gold  was  simply  a  legal  tender  precisely  like  the  green- 
backs. 

Mr.  Kelley,  of  Kansas,  said  : 

Some  gentleman,  two  or  three,  in  fact,  I  believe,  on  that  side  has  presented  the 
idea  that  now  to  remoaetize  silver  would  be  simply  giving  to  the  bullion-holders  or 
bullion-producer  100  cents  for  80  cents  of  silver.  In  reply  to  that  proposition  I  want 
to  say  that  you  have  not  only  stolen  from  the  bullion- producer  for  the  last  seven- 
teen years  that  20  cents  on  the  dollar,  but  you  have  stolen  from  the  corn-producer, 
from  the  wheat  producer,  from  the  oats-producer,  and  from  the  pork  and  beef 
producer  the  same  sum  during  all  of  these  years. 

*♦***♦ 

And  I  say  that  in  the  crisis  we  are  either  about  to  give  the  farmer  and  the  pro- 
ducer the  instrument  with  which  they  can  help  themselves  to  pay  off  the  mort- 
gages and  be  relieved  from  the  bondholders,  and  the  mortgage-holders,  or  we  are 


141 

about  to  retain  that  power  and  that  instrument  from  them  and  to  make  them 
forever  the  slaves  of  the  bond-holders,  and  the  slaves  of  the  holders  of  their 
obligations. 

It  has  been  repeatedly  asserted  upon  this  floor,  for  the  purpose  I  think  of  in- 
fluencing votes  upon  this  question,  that  if  this  bill  is  passed  it  will  receive  the  veto 
of  the  Executive  of  this  Government.  Well,  I  do  not  believe  in  that  kind  of  an 
argument,  but  inasmuch  as  it  has  been  made,  I  want  to  put  alongside  of  it  this 
other  argument,  and  this  further  advice,  that  gentlemen  should  keep  their  ears 
close  to  the  ground  and  listen  to  the  voice  of  the  people ;  because  when  this 
question  is  voted  upon  to-morrow  it  will  decide  the  question  whether  may  of  the- 
members  of  this  House  shall  return  to  the  next  House,  or  whether  their  seats  are 
to  be  occupied  by  others.    [Applause.] 

Mr.  TAYLOR,  of  Illinois,  addressing  Mr.  Bartine,  said :  Does  not  the  gentleman 
know  that  you  can  buy  silver  bars  for  80  cents  on  the  dollar  in  London  to  day  ? 

Mr.  BARTINE.    Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  TAYLOR,  of  Illinois.  Now,  if  they  can  be  bought  for  80  cents  on  the  dollar 
and  sold  here  for  100  cents  on  the  dollar,  why  will  they  not  be  sent  here? 

Mr.  BARTINE.  I  will  answer  the  gentleman  in  a  word.  Silver  bars  sell  in 
London  at  80  per  cent,  to-day  ;  but  suppose  nur  mints  are  thrown  open  to  the 
coinage  of  silver  to-morrow,  then  where  will  you  find  a  man  who  will  be  willing 
to  sell  his  silver  at  that  price  ?  In  other  words,  does  not  the  gentleman  see  that 
the  opening  of  the  mints  brings  up  the  price  everywhere  and  destroys  his  whole 
argument  ? 

Mr.  TAYLOR,  of  Illinois.  But  they  will  bring  their  silver  here  and  take  away 
our  gold  just  as  long  as  our  gold  holds  out. 

Mr.  BARTINE.  Not  at  all.  At  the  beginning  there  may  be  one  transaction  of 
that  character,  but  when  the  silver  reaches  par  that  puts  an  end  to  speculation. 
Why  did  it  not  have  the  effect  which  the  gentleman  suggests  in  France,  when 
they  had  free  coinage  there  ?  The  facts  are  against  his  theory.  Of  course  there 
is  a  profit  in  the  first  instance,  but  as  soon  as  the  silver  is  brought  to  par  the  profit 
<iisappear8.  It  is  only  because  there  is  a  little  surplus  of  silver  left  over  that  is  not 
turned  into  coin  that  men  got  the  idea  of  a  discount  upon  silver ;  but  every  nation 
in  the  world  maintains  its  silver  money  at  par  ;  not  one  of  them  has  any  silver 
to  spare,  and,  as  far  as  the  coin  is  concerned,  it  could  only  be  brought  here  and 
recoined  at  a  loss. 

Again,  we  are  always  being  confronted  with  the  bugbear  of  the  United  Statee 
being  flooded  with  cheap  silver  from  somewhere.  That  is  a  most  remarkable  ar- 
gument in  view  of  the  fact  that  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  shows  that  the  total 
amount  of  silver  available  for  coinage  after  the  wants  of  other  countries  are  sup- 
plied is  only  $51,000,000  a  year,  and  he  tells  us  that  if  we  adopt  his  plan  we  can 
take  all  the  available  silver  of  the  world  without  danger  or  trouble  ;  but  the  in- 
stant we  propose  free  coinage  the  fifty-one  millions  become  magnified  into  five 
hundred  millions,  or  some  other  almost  inconceivable  amount,  and  we  are  threat- 
ened with  the  danger  of  a  great  tidal-wave  of  cheap  silver  from  some  unknown 
and  undiscoverable  quarter.  Now,  Mr.  Speaker,  with  reference  to  this  suggestion, 
I  wish  to  say  that  the  little  reading  and  study  I  have  been  able  to  devote  to  this 
subject  have  never  brought  to  my  attention  a  single  nation  on  the  face  of  the 
earth  that  has  been  cursed  with  too  much  silver,  and,  as  Senator  Evarts  shows 
in  his  elaborate  speech  delivered  a  few  days  ago,  our  gold  will  not  go  abroad  un- 
less the  currents  of  trade  carry  it  there,  and  we  get  something  for  it ;  and  if  we  do 
get  an  equivalent,  what  difference  whether  it  goes  abroad  or  not  does  it  make? 
Value  is  value,  and  if  we  get  the  same  value  in  silver,  we  are  not  hurt.  Again,  it 
is  said  that  the  fact  of  silver  having  depreciated  under  the  operation  of  the  exist- 
ing law  is  proof  that  free  coinage  will  not  bring  it  to  par.  A  more  untenable  ar- 
gument than  that  waa  never  made  in  this  world. 

Mr.  McKinley  closed  the  debate  by  a  catcli-all  speech  in  favor  of 
everything  that  is  good  in  money  and  nothing  that  is  bad.  He  would 
have  gold,  silver,  and  paper  equal  and  equally  good.  He  would 
have  only  the  best  money,  and,  of  course,  the  best  money,- in  his  view, 


142 

is  the  dearest — that  which  is  growing  dearer.  By  parity  of  reason- 
ing, the  best  yard  stick  woukl  be  the  one  that  was  growing  longer 
all  the  time.  Some  day  we  may  learn  that  the  ^'  best"  money 
is  that  which  is  most  stable  in  value,  and  that  if  silver  is  more  stable 
than  gold  it  is  the  better  money. 

Mr.  McKinley  closed  the  debate  with  this  sentence — 

"And  I  stand  here  to-day  speaking  not  for  a  single  section  but  for  my  country 
and  for  the  whole  country,  and  I  say  that  it  is  for  the  highest  and  best  interests  of 
all  that  whatever  money  we  have  it  must  be  based  upon  both  gold  and  silver  and 
represent  the  best  money  in  the  world."     [Loud  applau&e.] 

When  Mr.  Bland  moved  to  concur  in  the  Senate  amendment,  the 
vote  was  taken  on  section  1  of  the  Senate  bill  as  follows,  this  being 
the  only  yea  and  nay  vote: 

Amend  by  striking  out  section  1,  and  insert  the  following: 

"  That  from  and  after  the  date  of  the  passage  of  this  act  the  unit  of  value  in  the 
United  States  shall  be  the  dollar,  and  the  same  may  be  coined  of  412J  grains  of 
standard  silver,  or  of  95.8  grains  of  standard  gold;  and  the  said  coins  shall  be  legal 
tender  for  all  debts,  public  and  private.  That  hereafter  any  owner  of  silver  or 
gold  bullion  may  deposit  the  same  at  any  mint  of  the  United  States  to  be  formed 
into  standard  dollars  or  bars  for  his  benefit  and  without  charge;  but  it  shall  be 
lawful  to  refuse  any  deposit  of  less  value  than  $100,  or  any  bullion  so  base  as  to  be 
unsuitable  for  the  operations  of  the  mint." 

The  vote  was  as  follows  : 


YEAS— 135. 

Abbott, 

Chipman, 

Gifi"ord, 

McCreary, 

Sayers, 

Alderson, 

Clarke,  Ala. 

Goodnight, 

McMillin, 

Shively, 

Allen,  Miss. 

Clements, 

Grimes, 

McRae, 

Skinner, 

Anderson,  Kans. 

Cobb, 

Hare, 

Mills, 

Smith,  111. 

Anderson,  Miss. 

Council, 

Hatch, 

Montgomery, 

Springer, 

Bankhead, 

Cooper,  Ind. 

Haynes, 

Moore,  Tex. 

Stewart,  Ga. 

Barnes, 

Cothran, 

Heard, 

Morrill, 

Stewart,  Tex. 

Bartine, 

Cowles, 

Hemphill, 

Morrow, 

Stockdale, 

Blanchard, 

Crain, 

Henderson,N.C.Norton, 

Stone,  Ky. 

Bland, 

Crisp, 

Herbert, 

Gates, 

Stone,  Mo. 

Blount, 

Culberson, Tex 

.  Hermann, 

O'Ferrall, 

Tarsney, 

Boatner, 

Cummings, 

Hoi  man. 

O'Neall  Ind. 

Tillman, 

Breckinridge,Ark 

.  Davidson, 

Keliey, 

Owen,  Ind. 

Town8end,Colo. 

Breckinridge.  Ky 

.  De  Haven, 

K^rr,  Pa. 

Owens,  Ohio, 

Tucker, 

Brick  ner. 

Dockery, 

Kilgore, 

Barrett, 

Turner,  Ga. 

Brookshire, 

Doreey, 

Lane, 

Paynter, 

Turner,  Kans. 

Brown,  J.  B. 

Edmunds, 

Lanham, 

Peel, 

Venable, 

Brunner, 

Elliott. 

Laws, 

Penington, 

Wade, 

Buchanan,  Va. 

Ellis, 

Lee, 

Perkins, 

Washington, 

Bullock, 

Enloe, 

Lester,  Ga. 

Perry, 

Wheeler,  Ala. 

Bunn, 

Feathers  ton, 

Lester,  Va. 

Peters, 

Whiting, 

Bynum, 

Fithian, 

Lewis, 

Pierce, 

Whitthorne, 

Candler,  Ga. 

Forman, 

Magner, 

Post, 

Wilkinson, 

Carlton, 

Forney, 

Mansur, 

Reilly, 

Williams,  111. 

Carter, 

Fowler, 

Martin,  Ind. 

Richardson, 

Williams,  Ohio, 

Caruth, 

FunstoD, 

McClammy, 

Robertson, 

Wilson,  Mo. 

Catchings, 

Gibson, 

McClellan, 

Rowland, 

Wilson,  W.  Va. 

143 


NAYS— 152. 

Adama, 

Cheatham, 

Harmer, 

Moore,  N.  H. 

Allen,  Mich. 

Clancy, 

Haugen, 

Morey, 

Andrew, 

Cogswell, 

Henderson,  111. 

Morse, 

Arnold, 

Coleman, 

Henderson,  la. 

Mudd, 

Atkinson,  Pa. 

Comstock, 

Hill, 

Mutchler, 

Baker, 

Conger, 

Hitt, 

Niedringhaus, 

Banks, 

Covert, 

Hopkins, 

O'Donnell, 

Bavne, 

Craig, 

Houk, 

O'Neil,  Mass. 

Beck  with, 

Culbertson,  Pa. 

Kennedy, 

O'Neil,  Pa. 

Belden, 

Cutcheon, 

Kerr,  Iowa, 

Payne, 

Belknap, 

Dargan, 

Ketcham, 

Pay eon. 

Bergen, 

Darlington, 

Kinsey, 

Pugsley, 

Binjiham, 

DeLano, 

Knapp, 

Quackenbush, 

Bliss, 

Dingley, 

Lacev, 

Quinn, 

Boothman, 

Dolliver, 

LaFollette, 

Raines, 

Bou  telle, 

Dunnell, 

Laidlaw, 

Reed,  Iowa, 

Bowden, 

Dunphy, 

Lansing, 

Reyburn, 

Brewer, 

Evaus, 

Lehlbach, 

Rife, 

Brosius, 

Farquhar, 

Lind, 

Rowell, 

Brower, 

Finley, 

Lodge, 

Rusk, 

Browne,  Va. 

Flick, 

Maish, 

Russell, 

Buckalew, 

Flood, 

Mason, 

Sandford, 

Burrows, 

Flower, 

McAdoo, 

Sawyer, 

Burton, 

Frank, 

McComas, 

Scranton, 

Butterworth, 

Gear, 

McCord, 

Scull, 

Caldwell, 

Geissenhainer, 

McDuffie, 

Sherman, 

Campbell, 

Gest, 

McKenna, 

Simonds, 

Candler,  Mass. 

Greenhalge, 

McKinley, 

Smith,  W.  Va. 

Cannon, 

Grout, 

Miles, 

Smyser, 

Caswell, 

Hall, 

Milliken, 

Snider, 

Cheadle, 

Hansbrough, 

Moffitt, 

Spinola, 

Spooner, 

Stephenson, 

Stewart,  Vt. 

Stivers, 

Stockbridge, 

Struble, 

Stump, 

Sweney, 

Taylor,  111. 

Taylor,  Tenn. 

Taylor,  E.  B. 

Thomas, 

Townsend,  Pa. 

Tracey, 

Turner,  N.  Y. 

Vandever, 

Van  Schaick, 

Vaux, 

Wa<^dill, 

Wallace,  Mass. 

Wallace,  N.  Y. 

Watson, 

Wiley, 

Willcox, 

Wilson,  Ky. 

Wilson,  Wash. 

Wright, 

Yardley. 


Thus  the  free  coinage  bill  which  passed  the  Senate  by  a  majority 
of  17  was  lost  in  the  House  by  a  like  majority  of  17. 


CHAPTER  X. 


The  Conference  Committee. 

June  28th,  the  Senate  was  notified  that  the  House  had  disagreed 
to  the  Senate  amendments  to  bill,  H.  R.  5381,  and  asked  for  a  con- 
ference^ and  had  appointed  as  conferrees  on  the  part  of  the  House 
Messrs.  Conger,  Walker  and  Bland. 

On  motion  of  Mr.  Morrill,  the  Senate  acceded  to  the  request  of  the 
House  for  a  conference,  and  Mr.  Sherman,  Mr.  Jones,  of  Nevada,  and 
Mr.  Harris,  were  appointed  conferrees  on  the  part  of  the  Senate. 

What  took  place  in  conference  has  not  been  made  public,  except  as 
to  the  result  of  the  conference. 

On  the  Tth  of  July,  however,  Mr.  Bland  made  a  personal  explana- 
tion in  the  House  as  follows  : 

Personal  Explanation. 

Mr.  BLAND.  Mr.  Speaker,  I  desire  to  have  read  the  following  from  the  Post, 
of  this  city,  which  I  send  to  the  clerk's  desk. 

The  clerk  read  as  follows : 

No  Agreement  on  the  Silver  Bill. 

''The  Republican  members  of  the  conference  committee  on  the  silver  bill  were  in 
session  yesterday.  It  was  the  intention  to  hold  a  regular  conference,  but  Repre 
sentative  Bland  of  the  House  conferrees,  and  Senator  Harris,  of  the  Senate  con- 
ferrees, were  both  absent.  The  principal  topic  discussed,  it  is  understood,  was  in 
regard  to  the  amount  of  silver  to  be  purchased  monthly — whether  it  shall  be  4,500,- 
000  ounces  or  $4,500,000  worth. 

'The  proposition  to  strike  out  the  bullion- redemption  feature  was  also  a  subject 
of  some  discussion.  No  final  decision  on  either  point  was  arrived  at  when  the 
meeting  adjourned- 

"  It  is  expected  that  the  conferrees  will  meet  early  next  week." 

Mr.  BLAND.  Mr.  Speaker  in  order  that  I  may  not  be  put  in  a  false  light,  as 
not  having  attended  to  my  duties  in  not  being  present  at  that  conference  com- 
mittee meeting,  I  det»ire  to  have  the  following  read. 

The  clerk  read  as  follows  : 

"Room  of  Committee  on  Coinage,  Weights  and  Measures, 

"House  of  Representatives,  United  States, 

"  Washington,  D.  C,  July  3,  1890. 

"  Dear  Mr.  Bland  :  I  saw  Senator  Sherman  after  our  adjournment  and  we  con- 
cluded not  to  have  a  meeting  of  the  conference  on  Saturday.  Will  notify  you  in 
time  of  next  meeting. 

"Respectfully,  "E.  H.  CONGER." 

Mr.  BLAND.  Mr.  Speaker,  I  desire  to  state  that  at  our  meeting  on  Thursday 
last  it  was  understood  that  the  conference  committee  was  to  meet  again  at  11 
o'clock  last  Saturday,  but  on  Friday  evening  I  received  that  note  from  the  chair- 
man of  the  Committee  on  Coinage,  Weights  and  Measures  [Mr.  Congkk]  notifying 
me  that  the  meeting  would  not  be  held,  and  hence  my  absence.  I  do  not  under- 
stand why  the  statement  should  have  been  published  that  I  was  not  present,  I 
having  been  notified  that  there  would  be  no  meeting.  I  do  not  see  present  this 
morning  the  gentleman  from  Iowa  [Mr.  Conger],  chairman  of  the  Committee  on 
Coinage,  Weights  and  Measures,  who  sent  me  that  note.    I  have  been  informed, 


145 

however,  that  it  wag  an  effort  on  the  part  of  the  Republican  conferre«8  to  reach 
some  cone  usioa  at  the  m^etinaj  which  was  held.  If  the  committee  of  conference 
is  to  degeaerate  into  a  Rnpublican  caucus,  as  a  matter  of  course  I  will  not  be  pres- 
ent, but  I  am  always  present,  when  uolifit'd  that  there  will  be  a  meeting  at  which 
.an  effort  wi  1  be  madn  to  come  to  some  reasonable  legislation  upon  this  subject. 
I  do  not  desire,  therefore,  to  be  advertis-'d  as  being  absent  and  not  attending  to 
my  duties,  the  fact  being  that  I  was  notified  that  my  presence  was  not  desired. 

The  following  is  the  report  of  the  conference  committee,  which 
became  the  law,  of  July  14th  : 

[Pdblic— No.  214.] 

An  act  directing  the  purchase  of  silver  bullion  and  the  issue  of  Treasury  notes 
thereon,  and  for  other  purposes. 
Be  U  enacted  by  the  Seruite  and  House  of  Represcntntives  of  the  United  Slates  of 
Ame^'icain  Congress  assembled,  That  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  is  herebv  directed 
1»  purchase,  from  time  to  lime,  silver  bullion  to  the  aggregate  amount  of  four  mil- 
lion five  hundred  thousand  ounces,  or  so  much  thereof  as  may  be  offered  in  each 
moi.th,  at  the  market  prif-e  thereof,  not  exceeditii;  one  dollar  for  three  hundred 
and  seventy-one  and  twenty  five  hundredths  grains  of  pue  silver,  and  to  issue  in 
payment  for  such  purchaset  of  silver  bullion  Tieaeury  notes  of  the  United  States 
to  be  prepared  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  in  such  form  and  of  such  de- 
nominations, not  less  than  one  dollar  nor  more  than  one  thousand  dollars,  as  he 
may  prescribe,  and  a  sum  sufficient  to  carry  into  effect  the  provisions  of  this  yet 
is  hereby  appropriated  out  of  any  money  in  the  Treasury  not  otherwise  appropri- 
ated. 

Skc.  2.  That  the  Treasury  notes  issued  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  this 
act  shall  be  redeemable  on  demand,  in  coin,  at  the  Treasury  of  the  United  States, 
or  at  the  office  of  any  assistant  treasurer  of  the  United  States,  and  when  so  re- 
deemed may  be  reissued  ;  but  no  greater  or  less  amount  of  such  notes  shall  be 
outstanding  at  any  time  than  the  cost  of  the  silver  bullion  and  the  standa'd  silver 
do]  ars  coined  rherefrom,  then  held  in  the  Treasury  purchased  by  such  notes  ;  and 
such  Tr.  asury  notes  shall  be  a  legal  tender  in  payment  of  all  debts,  public  and 
private,  except  where  otherwise  expressly  stipulated  in  the  contiact,  and  shall  be 
receivable  for  customs,  tax  s,  and  all  public  du'S,  and  when  so  received  may  be 
reif^Eued ;  and  such  notes,  when  held  by  any  national  banking  association,  may  be 
counted  as  a  part  of  its  lawful  ret-erve.  That  upon  demand  of  the  holder  of  any 
of  the  Treasury  notes  herein  provided  for  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  shall, 
un  er  such  regulations  as  he  may  prescribe,  redeem  such  notes  ir>  gold  or  silver 
coin,  at  his  discretion,  it  being  he  established  policy  of  the  United  States  to  main- 
tain the  tvvo  metals  on  a  parity  with  each  other  upon  the  present  legal  ratio,  or 
Buch  ratio  as  may  be  provided  by  law. 

Sec.  3.  That  he  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  shall  each  month  coin  two  million 
ounces  of  the  silver  bullion  pun  based  urder  the  provisions  of  this  act  into  stand- 
ard silver  dollars  until  the  tirst  day  of  July  eighteen  hundred  and  n  netv-one, 
and  after  that  time  he  shall  coin  of  the  silver  bullion  purchased  under  the  provis- 
ions of  this  act  as  much  as  may  be  nec-ssary  to  provide  for  the  redemptiori  of  the 
Treasury  notes  herein  provided  for,  and  any  gain  or  teigniorage  arising  from  such 
coinage  shall  be  accounted  for  and  paid  into  the  Treasury. 

Skc.  4.  That  the  silver  bullion  purchased  under  the  provisions  of  this  act  shall 
be  subject  to  the  requirements  of  existing  law  and  the  regulations  of  the  mint 
service  governing  the  methods  of  determining  the  amount  of  pure  silver  contained, 
and  the  amount  of  charges  or  deductions,  if  any,  to  be  made. 

SiiC.  5,  That  so  much  of  the  act  of  Februaiy  twei  tv-eighth,  eighteen  hundred 
and  eeventveight,  entitled  "  An  act  to  authorize  thecoinage  oi  the  standard  silver 
dollar  and  to  restore  its  legal  tender  character,"  as  requires  the  monthly  purchase 
and  coinage  of  the  same  into  silver  dollars  of  not  ]e^s  than  two  mil  ion  dollars, 
nor  more  than  four  million  dollars'  worth  of  silver  bullion,  is  hereby  repealed. 

Skc.  6.  Toat  upm  the  passage  of  this  act  the  balances  standing  with  the  Treas- 
urer of  the  Unied  State*"  to  the  respective  credit')  of  national  banks  for  deposits 
made  to  redeem  the  circulating  notes  of  such  banks,  and  all  deposits  thereafter 
received  for  like  purpose,  shall  be  covered  into  the  Treasury  as  a  miscellaneous 


146 

receipt,  and  the  Treasury  of  the  United  States  shall  redeem  from  the  general  caah 
in  the  Treasury  the  circulating  notes  of  said  banks  which  may  come  into  his  pos 
Beeeion  subject  to  redemption ;  and  upon  the  certificate  of  the  Comptroller  of  the- 
Currency  that  such  notes  have  been  received  by  him  and  that  they  have  been 
destroyed  and  that  no  new  notes  will  be  issued  in  their  place,  reimbursement  of  their 
amount  shall  be  made  to  the  Treasurer,  under  such  regulations  as  the  Secretary  of 
Treasury  may  prescribe,  froaa  an  appropriation  hereby,  created,  to  be  known  a» 
National  bank  notes  :  Redemption  account,  but  the  provisions  of  this  act  shall  not 
apply  to  the  deposits  received  under  section  three  of  the  act  of  June  twentieth, 
eighteen  hundred  and  seventy-four,  requiring  every  National  bank  to  keep  in 
lawful  money  with  the  Treasurer  of  the  United  States  a  sum  equal  tofiveper- 
centum  ot  its  circulation,  to  be  held  and  used  for  the  redemption  of  its  circulating 
notes ;  and  the  balance  remaining  of  the  deposits  so  covered  shall,  at  the  close  of 
each  month,  be  reported  on  the  monthly  public  debt  statement  as  debt  of  the 
United  States  bearing  no  interest. 

"  Sfc.  7.  That  this  act  shall  take  effect  thirty  days  from  and  after  its  passage." 

Approved,  July  14,1890. 

Mr.  Sherman,  on  July  8th,  called  up  the  report  in  the  Senate. 
Prolonged  discussion  tool^ place,  a  few  extracts  from  which  are  her& 
given  : 

Mr.  Sherman,  in  calling  up  the  report,  said  : 

Now,  as  to  the  second  section,  the  legal-tender  clause  in  the  House  bill,  the 
Senate  bill  was  somewhat  different  but  somewhat  alike  also.  The  legal-tender 
clause  of  the  Senate  bill  is  as  follows : 

"Shall  be  a  legal  tender  for  the  payment  of  all  debts,  public  and  private." 

Then  the  question  came  up  whether  that  would  prevent  a  man  making  a  con- 
tract payable  in  wheat,  in  corn,  or  in  whisky,  or  for  the  delivery  of  any  other 
property,  or  whether  if  a  contract  was  made  payable  in  gold,  as  in  many  portions' 
of  the  country  contracts  are  so  made,  a  citizen  of  the  United  States  should  be  de- 
prived of  the  right  to  contract  for  whatever  he  chooses  between  himself  and  other 
parties.  Besides  that,  we  found  that  the  silver  dollar  had  the  same  limitation  that 
was  applied  here.  The  silver  dollar  under  the  Bland  law  is  not  a  legal  tender 
where  the  contract  expressly  stipulates  that  some  other  mode  of  payment  shall  be 
made. 

We  therefore  agreed  nem..  con.  that  we  would  not  give'  to  this  Treasury  note 
issued  for  this  silver  a  higher  attribute  as  a  legal  tender  than  the  silver  dollar  upon 
which  it  was  based,  and  you  will  find  in  the  Bland  law  this  clause,  "except  where 
otherwise  expressly  stipulated  in  the  contract."  We  took  from  that  law  as  it  has 
now  stood  for  twelve  years  this  provision  and  applied  it  to  the  legal  tender  clause, 
relating  to  the  Treasury  notes,  and  that  would  be  the  law  which  would  b«  applied  by 
the  courts  even  without  such  a  stipulation.  But  in  order  to  make  it  clear,  so  that 
the  people  would  see  the  exact  nature  of  these  Treasury  notes,  these  words  were 
copied  from  the  Bland  act,  "except  where  otherwise  expressly  stipulated  in  the 
contract." 

It  was  absolutely  necessary,  at  any  rate,  to  make  this  stipulation  where  the  Gov- 
ernment has  promised  to  pay  gold,  as  in  the  gold  certificates.  This  provision  is 
based  on  the  broad  principle  that  where  two  persons  agree  upon  the  mode  of  pay- 
ment, it  would  be  an  outrage  and  a  wrong  and  a  denial  of  the  right  to  make  a 
contract  for  us  to  say  that  the  payment  should  be  made  in  something  or  other  not 
provided  for  in  the  contract. 

But  Senator  Sherman  knows  very  well  that  a  contract  to  deliver 
"wheat  or  corn  or  whisky,"  may  he  liquidated  in  money.  One  fail- 
ing to  deliver  the  specific  article  contracted  for  is  made  to  pay  the  value 
thereof  in  lawful  money.  The  Senator  also  knows  that  before  the  act 
of  1873,  or  before  the  adoption  of  the  Revised  Statutes,  June,  1874, 
gold  and  silver  coins'were  equally  legal  tender  in  contracts  of  every 


147 

de8ori})tlon.  A  contract  to  deliver  gold  would  have  been  discharged 
by  the  payment  of  its  value  in  silver  money,  or  a  contract  to  deliver 
silver  would  have  l)8en  satisfied  on  tlie  tender  of  <;old.  Gold  and 
silver  were  alike  solvents  into  which  all  obligations  were  resolvable, 
and  that  condition  must  be  restored.  The  Senate  bill  made  legal- 
tender  for  silver  the  same  as  for  gold,  just  as  it  should  be  ;  the  con- 
ference comioittee  changed  it. 

Further  on  the  following  colloquy  took  place : 

Mr.  VEST.    May  I  aek  the  Senator  a  quesfion? 

Mr.  SHERMAN.     Certainly. 

Mr.  VEST.  I  understood  him,  although  there  was  some  conversation  around 
me  at  the  time  and  I  may  have  misunderstood  him,  lo  assert  that  the  language  of 
the  first  section  was  identical  with  the  language  of  the  first  section  in  the  Bland 
bill,  the  previous  silver  legislation. 

Mr.  SHERMAN.  No,  I  do  not  say  that.  I  said  that  the  language  "at  the 
market  price  thereof"  is  precisely  the  same.  The  additional  words  "when 
oflfered."  I  stat^^d  werf^  asireeH  to  in  conference. 

Mr.  VEST.  I  am  a  little  curious  to  know  on  the  motion  of  which  set  of  conferees 
those  words  were  put  in,  the  House  or  the  Senate  ? 

Mr.  SHERMAN.  I  should  have  no  objection  to  telling, except  that  it  is  against 
the  express  rule  to  do  so. 

Mr.  VE!^T.    The  Senator  was  stating  that  the  House  demanded 

Mr.  SHERMAN.  The  Senator  might  be  surprised  at  the  answer  if  I  were  to 
answer  the  question. 

Mr.  VEST.     I  am  willing  to  be  Furprised. 

Mr.  SHERMAN.  I  do  not  desire  on  the  conference  report  to  go  into  particu- 
lars. If  there  is  any  point  of  this  bill  that  any  Senator  desires  information  about 
I  will  try  to  give  it  to  him,  so  far  as  the  rules  of  the  St^nate  allow. 

Mr.  STEWART.  I  should  like  to  ask  in  regard  to  the  phrase  "or  eo  much 
thereof  ae  m'-!v  be  offered  in  each  month,  at  the  market  price  thereof." 

Mr.  SHERMAN,  I  have  already  ststed  about  that.  If  it  is  not  offered  as  a 
matter  of  course  the  Secretary  cannot  buy  it. 

Mr.  STEWART.  I  should  like  the  views  of  the  Senator  from  Ohio  as  to  whether 
it  would  be  the  duty  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  under  the  language  used  in 
the  hi)  1  to  buy  four  and  a  half  million  ounces  per  month  if  that  amount  were 
offered,  or  could  he  decline  to  buy  on  the  pref^ext  that  it  was  not  offered  in  this 
country  at  the  market  price  in  London  ?  C'  uld  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  de- 
press the  price  of  silver  by  refusing  to  buy  unless  he  could  get  offers  at  the  Lon- 
don pr'ce? 

Mr.  SHERMAN.  I  have  no  doubt  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  under  the 
gravest  rpsponsibilities  and  gravest  obligations  to  obey  this  law  rigidly,  would  not 
allow  him-elf  any  doubtful  rocstruction.  He  vould  go  on  and  buy,  whatever 
might  be  the  rf  suits  to  him  or  to  anybody,  four  and  one  half  million  ounces  a 
month.  We  cannot  legislate  upon  the  idea  that  the  officers  of  the  law  will  disre- 
gard the  law  or  evt  de  it  or  avoid  it.  If  I  thought  so  I  would  w^ant  to  abolish  the 
ofiice  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury.  The  eye  of  any  man  holding  that  position 
■would  be  keenly  set  upon  the  language  of  the  law  and  a  fair  construction  of  the 
law,  and  it  is  not  to  be  assumed  that  he  will  avoid  or  t  v-de  the  duty  imposed 
upon  him,  whether  he  approve  1^  or  not.  I  have  not  the  slightef-t  doubt  that  the 
present  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  or  any  other  Secretary,  whatever  may  be  his 
party  creed,  would  obey  the  law ;  and  if  not,  he  ought  not  to  be  there  a  moment, 
and  he  would  be  liable  to  impeachment  if  he  disobeyed  the  law. 

Mr.  STEWART.  I  merely  want  to  get  the  Senator's  idea.  The  Senator  then 
doefl  not  think  there  car.  be  any  danger  of  the  Stcretary's  failing  to  buy  four  and  a 
half  million  ounces  of  silver  a  month  if  he  can  get  it  for  less  than  par  as  provided 
in  this  set? 

M.  SHERMAN.  I  have  not  the  slightest  doubt  of  that.  You  can  not  legislate 
upon  the  idea  that  the  officers  will  not  execute  the  law. 


148 

Mr.  YOORHEES.  Mr  President,  in  the  practice  of  my  profession  I  always 
dread  a  packed  jury.  I  always  am  reluctant  to  go  into  a  court  where  I  know  the 
mind  of  the  court  is  made  tkp  against  me  to  try  a  case  by  a  jury,  a  majority  of 
whom  I  know  are  adverse  to  my  client. 

The  trouble  abcut  tbis  bill  is  not  a*  to  whether  a  Secretary  will  obey  the  law 
where  the  law  is  made  fxplicit,  clear,  and  mandatory,  but  there  is  not  a  single 
sectif  n  in  this  conference  report  or  in  the  bill  that  has  been  reported  by  the  con- 
fereme  committee  but  what  has  a  f  is-cretion  given  to  the  Stcretary  of  theTreaetuy 
who  is  "  packed  "  against  silver. 

That  is  my  dread  about  this  bill  and  one  of  the  strong  reasons  why  I  shall  not 
vote  for  it.  There  is  not  a  s'ngle  section  that  does  not  convey  and  have  in  it  a 
discretion  to  the  Secretary  of  «he  Treas-ury  by  which  he  can  destroy,  dishonor,  and 
degrade  silver  as  money;  and  the  best  evidence  that  that  is  the  purpose  of  this 
bill  is  to  be  found  in  the  advocates  of  it  and  the  advocates  of  these  powers  thus 
given  to  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury. 

Sir,  I  do  not  seek  to  reflect  upon  the  present  Secretary  of  the  Treasury — far  from 
it.  The  Treasury  Department  has  been  packed  against  silver  ever  since  I  have 
bpen  a  member  of  this  body — not  merely  your  party  on  that  side  of  the  Chamber, 
but  my  own,  until  I  am  weary  of  it. 

Thirteen  years  ago  when  I  took  my  seat  in  this  body  I  announced  my  adherence 
to  the  free  coinage  of  s-ilver,  and  I  have  had  no  reason  at  a  single  moment 
since  to  change  my  mind  upon  that  subject.  I  represent  in  part  one  of  the  strong- 
est Commonwealths  so  far  as  its  businecs  is  concerned  that  exists  beneath  the  flag, 
and  I  say  here  to  Senato)s  that  there  are  not  a  thousand  men  in  the  State  of 
Indiana  (except  such  as  desire  favors  at  the  hands  of  this  Administration  which 
is  adverse  to  the  free  coinage  cf  silver)  who  would  not  vote  to-day  for  its  free 
coinage. 

What  is  the  spectacle  presented  here  in  this  body  ?  I  am  amazed  at  Senators. 
I  will  not  use  offensive  language,  but  I  am  amazed  at  the  hardihood,  of  Senators 
who  stand  up  in  this  body  lo  take  back  all  we  said  and  all  we  did  and  all  we  voted 
for  within  the  last  three  or  four  v  eeks.  Seventeen  majority  of  the  Senate  of  the 
United  States  is  treatfd  as  chaff— one  fifth  of  this  body  was  embodied  in  a  major- 
ity on  this  subject — seventeen  majority  for  the  free  coinage  of  silver,  and  the  rep- 
resentatives of  this  body  on  the  conference  committee  have  treated  that  expres- 
Bion  as  idle,  and  it  is  to  go  for  naught  I 

My  word  for  it,  the  Ameiican  people,  those  who  labor,  thoee  who  toil,  fhoi=e  who 
delve,  1  hose  who  sow,  those  who  reap  and  mow,  will  not  consider  this  ac  ion  on  the 
part  of  the  Senate  a  few  weeks  ago  ss  idle  or  as  not  binding.  I  think  I  know 
better  why  the  people  of  this  country  in  their  trouble  and  distress  lifted  up  their 
heads  and  looked  this  way,  and  they  breathed  a  little  freer  wi  en  they  saw  that 
the  Senate  of  the  United  States,  that  body  so  often  spoken  of  and  derided  for  its 
conservatism  and  its  want  of  progrees,  had  gone  so  far  on  a  measure  of  relief  for 
the  laboring  people.  They  rejoiced  at  it,  and  in  the  last  three  weeks,  while  this 
measure  has  been  pending  iu  the  committee  of  conference  bound  up  in  doubt, 
more  expressions  in  the  way  of  petitions,  and  letters,  and  the  like,  have  reached 
here  than  even  during  the  discussion  that  was  on. 

******* 

Sir,  the  Senator  from  Ohio  [Mr.  Sherman]  was  inaccurate  in  another  statement. 
Heeaid  this  bill  bad  passed  the  Houee  of  Representatives  after  full  consideration. 
I  deny  it ;  I  utterly  deny  it.  I  ussert  here  that  if  the  bill  had  had  free  way 
without  the  tyranny  of  existing  circumstances,  40  majority  wouM  have  marked 
the  paspjige  of  a  free-coinage  measure  in  the  House  of  Kepresentatives. 

Mr.  ThiLLER.  Mr  Prebident,  I  do  not  intend  to  detain  the  Senate  at  any  great 
leng  h  upon  this  conference  repo)t.  I  realize  full  well  and  my  experience  as  a 
member  of  this  body  has  taught  me  that  in  most  cases  legislation  proceeds  upon 
a  compromise,  and  my  experience  has  also  shown  me  that  in  a  great  m  \iority  of 
cases  compromises  are  unsatibfactory  to  both  sides,  and  I  have  not  much  doubt 
that  if  this  conference  report  is  accepted  and  this  bill  becomes  a  law,  we  shall  find 
that  it  is  not  entirely  svhat  we  supposed  it  would  be,  and  perhaps  not  what  either 
side  expected  it  would  be. 

Mr.  President,  the  silver  question  has  been  very  thoroughly  diFcuPsed.  It  has 
been  discussed  here,  been  (iiecuesed  in  the  public  press,  and  I  agree  wth  the 
Senator  from  Indiana  [Mr.  Vookhebs],  who  haa  just  taken  his  seat,  that  these  aw 


149 

about  the  only  places  where  it  has  been  discussed.  I  am  restrained  by  the  courtesleg 
that  are  due  to  another  body  from  expressing  my  opinion,  which  I  would  gladly 
do  were  it  proper  for  me-^o  so  <lo,  with  reference  to  the  ourse  of  another  branch 
of  the  Legislature  in  reference  to  this  question.  I  do  not  bfilieve  I  shall  depart 
irom  the  usual  courtesy  and  go  beyond  the  proprieties  of  thi?  place,  if  I  say  that 
in  my  judgment  nothing  done  with  reference  to  this  bill  in  that  House  redounds 
to  the  honor  of  the  American  name. 

I  shall  not  exceed,  I  think,  the  proprieties  of  debate  when  I  say  that  what  has 
been  considered  the  representative  body  of  the  American  people  absolutely  flouted 
in  the  face  of  the  American  people  tlie  demand  made  upon  them  by  Wall  street, 
disregarding  in  every  way  the  public  sentiment  of  their  constituents,  for  I  agree 
with  the  Senator  from  Texas  that  two-thirds  of  the  American  people  to-day  are 
in  favor  of  the  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  silver,  and  I  predict  here  now,  whether 
I  shall  be  a  member  of  the  Fift3'-second  Congress  or  not,  that  there  will  bf»  a  ma- 
jority in  the  next  House  of  Representatives  in  favor  of  the  free  coinage  of  silver, 
and  there  will  be  a  bigger  representative  vote  in  this  body  in  favor  of  the  free 
coinage  of  silver  in  the  Fifty-second  Cnigress  than  there  has  been  in  this;  not 
simply  because  we  shall  add  two  new  Sates  with  four  more  Senators,  hut  because 
I  believe  we  have  reached  a  position  in  American  affairs  when  the  American 
people  propose  to  be  heard  upon  this  financial  question,  when  the  American 
people,  the  men  who  toil  in  mills  and  machine  shops,  and  in  mines,  and  on  farms, 
and  in  o^unting-houses  propose  to  take  some  hand  in  the  legislation  which  con- 
cerns them  so  much  as  the  legislation  touching  money  does  in  this  country. 

Mr.  President,  the  debate  in  this  body  has  I  think  been  condu'  ted  with  reason- 
able feeling  on  both  sides,  with  leasonable  temper,  considering  the  importance  of 
the  subject  discussed  It  hap  not  been  so  discui-^ed  in  the  public  press.  We  have 
been  derided.  We  men  who  have  been  in  favorof  continuing  a  policy  that  origin- 
ated with  the  very  origin  of  the  Government,  the  maintienance  of  the  bimetallic 
system,  have  been  derided  and  calumniated  and  slandered,  not  only  in  the  public 
press  but  in  another  branch  of  the  legisldtive  department.  We  have  been  told 
that  this  legislation  was  born  of  a  desire  to  got  cheap  money.  We  have  been  told 
that  its  principal  advocates  were  those  only  who  were  interested  in  the  production 
of  silver. 

Mr.  Prf  sident,  the  people  of  the  State  that  I  in  part  represent  produce  more  silver 
than  any  other  community  in  the  world.  I  would  like  to  inquire  of  somebody  if 
it  is  a  disgrace  to  produce  that  which  has  been  from  the  dawn  of  civilization  the 
mainstay  and  the  hope  of  commerce,  the  mainstay  and  the  hope  of  civilization.  I 
want  to  know  whether  the  men  who  produce  silver  are  not  as  good  and  have  not  the 
same  right  to  present  their  interests  here  as  the  men  ^ho  produce  iron,  or  woolen 
goods,  or  any  thirg  else. 

Mr.  President,  the  men  who  produce  silver  do  not  rob  anybody.  They  do  not 
steal  anything  that  belongs  to  anybody  else.  When  the  hardy  miner  comes  out 
of  the  pit  at  night,  if  he  has  put  in  circulation  an  ounce  more  of  silver  or  a  fraction 
of  an  ounce  more  of  gold  than  was  in  circulation  before,  has  added  to  the  wealth 
of  the  world,  and  he  has  taken  nothing  from  anybody  else.  And  so,  Mr.  Presi(^ent, 
if  I  had  made  extended  arguments  in  defeuf^e  of  silver,  I  should  have  done  what 
my  brother  Senators  have  done  in  the  best  intort-st  of  their  States.  I  have  said 
here,  and  I  repeat  again,  that  I  have  not  been  moved  in  this  matter  with  reference 
specially  to  increasing  the  value  of  the  product  of  my  State, because  it  is  produced 
within  the  boundaries  of  my  State. 

1  have  been  in  favor  of  giving  it  an  enhanced  value,  because  it  is  an  American 
production.  I  have  been  in  favor  of  it  principally,  however,  because  its  enhanced 
price  insures  and  secures  not  only  to  the  people  of  this  country  but  of  all  the  world 
its  use  as  a  money  metal ;  and  so  I  have  taken  the  time  of  the  Senate  on  more 
than  one  occasion  to  speak  in  defense  of  this  interest,  not,  I  repeat,  because  it  was 
the  interest  of  Colorado  alone,  but  because  it  was  the  interest  of  all  the  people  of 
the  United  States  and  all  the  people  of  the  world 

In  another  place  when  this  matter  was  under  discussion  briefly,  trammelled,  ob- 
structed, and  hindered,  where  there  was  no  fair  expression  of  opinion,  where  there 
was  no  opportunity  to  put  the  bill  in  proper  shape,  where  there  was  denied,  arbi- 
trarily and  illegally  as  it  seems  to  me,  the  opportunity  to  make  amendments,  it  was 
eaid  that  there  had  been  around  the  Senate  and  around  the  House  during  the  past 
winter  an  extensive  lobby  in  the  interest  of  silver.    I  deny  it.    I  assert  here  that 


150 

there  has  been  no  lobby  about  the  Senate  nor  about  the  House  in  favor  of  silver. 
Last  fall  the  people  of  the  United  States,  without  reference  to  party  assembled  in 
the  city  of  St.  Louis  in  the  interest  of  the  use  of  silver  as  money. 

Mr.  STEWART.  Mr.  President,  if  this  bill  becomes  a  law  and  is  executed  in 
good  faith,  as  we  are  bound  to  assume  that  it  will  be,  and  four  and  a  half  million 
ounces  of  silver  are  purchased  each  month,  it  will  give  great  relief,  and  I  am  con- 
fident that  it  will  be  an  object  lesson  that  will  lead  to  free  coinage.  It  is  true  under 
the  bill  it  is  in  the  power  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  to  impair  its  usefulness 
by  not  purchasing  the  full  amount  each  mouth,  but  any  failure  to  do  so  on  the 
pretext  that  it  was  not  oifered  at  the  European  market  value  would  be  ench  a 
plain  violation  of  the  spirit  of  the  law  that  it  would  bring  down  universal  condem- 
nation, and  we  can  not  assume  or  believe  ihat  there  will  be  any  such  deeding  with 
the  administration  of  the  law.  I  believe  that  we  shall  purchase  the  full  four  and 
a  half  million  ounces  each  month ;  that  it  will  raise  the  price  of  silver  and  en- 
hance the  price  of  farm  products,  increase  our  exp  >rts  and  increase  the  exports  of 
farm  products,  relieve  the  American  people  more  than  many  now  anticipate,  and 
that  ultimately  we  shall  have  the  full  use  of  silver. 

I  ana  confident  that  if  by  the  administration  of  this  bill  it  does  not  meet  the 
anticipation  of  the  people,  or  with  its  full  administration  it  does  not  answer  the 
purpose,  the  country  is  sufliciently  educated  now  to  take  the  next  step  imme- 
diately. If  it  works  well— furnishes  the  relief  desired— it  will  stand  for  a  consid- 
erable time ;  it  will  stand  probably  until  w  e  can  get  co-operation  with  the  Latin 
Union.  I  do  not  anticipate  cooperation  with  England  and  Germany.  I  think 
we  shall  make  no  effort  to  get  them.  England  has  been  on  a  single  gold  standard 
since  1819  by  the  act  which  she  passed  in  1816,  and  it  is  not  probable  that  she 
will  change.  Germany  has  adopted  the  policy  of  England,  and  they  can  stand 
on  a  gold  basis. 

France,  and  the  associated  nations  with  France,  and  the  United  States  are 
abundantly  able  to  maintain  bimetallism  without  any  doubt  on  the  part  of  any 
one  who  has  considered  the  subject.  I  have  no  doubt  that  the  United  States  can 
do  it  alone.  Others  have  some  doubts  on  that  subject.  They  have  consented  to 
take  this  step,  which  is  in  the  right  direction,  and  it  is  a  law  that  we  can  get ;  it  is 
all  that  we  can  get;  and  it  seems  to  me  that  it  should  receive  the  vote  of  every 
friend  of  f-ilver. 

The  PRES I  DING  OFFICER  (Mr.  Dolph  in  the  chair).  The  question  is  on  con- 
curring in  tbe  report  of  the  committee  of  conference,  on  which  the  yeas  and  nays 
have  been  ordered. 

Mr.  COCKRELL.  Mr.  President-,  I  can  not  vote  for  this  conference  report.  My 
objections  to  it  I  will  state  as  briefly  as  lean. 

I  do  not  agree  with  tbe  distinguished  Senator  from  Ohio  [Mr.  Sheeman]  in  his 
interpretation  of  the  first  section  of  this  bill.  He  says  that  it  is  mandatorv  upon 
the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  to  purcha'^e  4,500,000  ounces  of  silver  monthly.  I 
do  not  believe  that  that  is  the  true  interpretation  of  this  clause.    The  language  is : 

"That  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  is  herebv  directed  to  purchase  from  time 
to  time  silver  bullion  to  the  aggregate  amount  of  4,500,000  ounces"  — 

Now,  that  would  be  -^Qandatory,  but  the  qualifying  words  are ; 
"  or  so  much  thereof  as  may  be  oftered,  in  each  month,  at  the  market  price  thereof 
not  exceeding  $1  for  371.25  grains  of  pure  silver." 

Mr.  MITCHELL.    May  I  ask  the  Senator  a  quf  stion  right  there? 

Mr.  COCKRELL.    Certainly. 

Mr.  MITCHELL  Does  the  Senator,  in  8p?aking  of  the  qualifying  words,  refer 
more  particularly  to  the  words  wliich  speak  of  the  market  price? 

Mr.  COCKRELL.  I  refer  to  the  words  "  or  so  much  thereof  as  may  be  offered," 
in  connection  with  the  market  price.  I  say  that  under  this  proposed  law  the  Sec- 
retary of  the  Treasury  determines,  decides,  declares  what  is  the  market  price. 
JNobody  else  can  do  it. 

Mr.  JONES,  of  Nevada.  May  I  ask  the  Senator  why  equally  the  Secretary  of 
the  Treasury  does  not  declare  the  market  price  under  the  Bland  act?  The  law- 
says  that  he  shall  buy  at  the  market  price,  and  fixes  that  as  the  price. 

Mr.  COCKRELL.  Under  the  Bland  act,  which  I  hold  in  my  hand,  he  must  pur- 
chase a  certain  amount. 

Mr.  JONES,  of  Nevada.    At  the  market  price  ? 

Mr.  COCKRELL.  Yes ;  but  not  "  or  so  much  thereof  as  may  be  offered,  in  eack 
month,  at  the  market  price." 


151 

Mr.  JONES,  of  Nevada.  He  could  not  buy  more  than  the  law  fixed  at  the  mar- 
ket  price. 

Mr.  COCKRELL.  Tne  Bland  act  says  that  he  must  purchase  not  less  thaa 
'JJjOOOjOOO  wfirth  in  each  mouth  at  the  market  price. 

Mr.  JOXES,  of  Nevada.    But  suppoae  he  can  not  get  it  at  the  market  price  ? 

Mr.  COCKRELL.    But  he  always  has  done  it. 

Mr.  JONES,  of  Nevada.  He  fixes  the  market  price  equally  under  the  Bland 
act  as  he  will  do  under  his  bill. 

Mr.  COCKRELL.  H-^  fix^is  the  market  price  there,  but  that  amount  is  not  one- 
half  the  product  of  the  United  States,  while  in  this  case  you  give  him  the  power 
to  purchase  4,500,000  ounces  a  month,  which  per  year  is  ^reatir  than  the  product 
of  the  mines  of  the  United  States;  and  you  say  "or  so  much  thereof  as  may  be 
offered."  You  do  not  compel  him  by  saying  that  he  must  purchase  4,500,009 
ounces  per  month. 

Mr.  JONES,  of  Nevada.  Then  the  Senator  is  afraid  there  will  not  be  that  much 
silver  offered  to  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury? 

Mr.  COCKRELL.  He  is  to  purchase  it  at  the  price  which  the  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury  may  determine  to  be  the  market  price. 

Mr.  JONES,  of  Nevada.  But  he  is  not  obliged  to  buy  the  $2,030,000  worth  a 
month  under  the  Bland  act,  except  at  the  market  price. 

Mr.  COCKRELL.  I  say  he  is  obliged  to  buy  12,000,000  worth  a  month  under 
the  Bland  act. 

*♦*»*♦♦ 

Mr.  MITCHELL.  The  question  I  desire  to  ask  the  Senator  from  Missouri  is  this : 
}ie  says  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  under  the  Bland  act  has  the  power  and  the 
right  to  fix  the  priced  silver.  Suppose  he  should  determine  what  price  he  would 
pay,  and  he  would  say  so  to  the  owners  of  silver  bullion,  and  not  a  man  should  re- 
spond, there  would  not  be  an  ounce  furnished,  and  therefore  he  could  not  buy  and 
would  not  buy.  What  I  want  to  know  is,  would  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  be 
impeachable  for  not  buying  $2,000,003  worth  per  month  under  the  Biand  act  in 
that  case  ? 

Mr.  COCKRELL.    Yes,  he  would  be  under  the  Bland  act,  just  the  reverse  of 
what  he  would  be  uuder  this  proposed  act.    He  must  pui-chase  not  less  than 
■f  2,000,000  worth  per  month  under  the  Bland  act.    You  have  no  limit  here. 
******* 

Mr.  JONES,  of  Nevada.  The  words  "directed  to  purchase"  and  ''shall  pur- 
chase" mean  substantially  the  same  thing ;  and  it  strikes  me  the  Senator  is  mak- 
ing a  mountain  out  of  a  mole-hill.  The  fact  of  the  business  is,  that  it  was  be- 
lieved, and  I  believe,  unless  the  production  of  silver  shall  largely  iacrea8<=i,  the 
4,500,000  ounces  per  month  will  more  than  exhaust  the  world's  demand  at  the 
rate  of  a  dollar  for  371]  erains  of  pure  silver,  and  that  clause  was  simply  put  in 
80  that  in  case  all  the  silver  available  for  purchase  was  exhausted,  the  Secretary 
of  the  Treacury  would  have  fulfilled  the  law  by  purchasing  all  that  was  offer^ 
at  a  price  not  exceeding  a  dollar  for  371',  grains. 

Mr.  SPOONER.  Has  there  been  any  difficully,  does  the  Senator  know,  in  as- 
certaining the  market  price  for  purchases  under  the  Bland  law? 

Mr.  COCKRELL.  I  suppose  not,  because  there  was  a  greater  quantity  in  the 
market  tlian  there  was  a  demand  for.  There  was  a  greater  amount  of  bullion, 
and  within  the  amount  which  the  Si^cretary  would  off'er  to  buy  he  would  say,  "  I 
will  give  this  day  so  much  an  ounce,"  and  they  would  gladly  take  it,  becauee  there 
was  no  other  market. 

Mr.  SPOONER.  If  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  could  without  difficulty  as- 
certain the  market  price  under  the  Bland  law,  why  may  he  not  without  difficulty 
ascertain  the  market  price  under  this  proposed  law? 

Mr.  JONE*?,  of  Nevada     By  the  same  means. 

Mr.  SPOONER.  And  by  the  same  means.  The  market  price  would  not  be  one 
thing  under  the  operation  of  one  law  and  another  thing  under  the  operation  of 
the  other,  would  it  ? 

♦  ***♦*♦ 

Mr.  HISCOCK.  That  is  all  there  is  of  it  and  all  there  can  ba  of  it.  As  I  said 
a  momeut  ago,  the  market  price  which  is  to  b 3  observe!  and  which  must  be  ob- 
served under  this  bill  is  reiogaizBi  throu^hou';  the  length  and  breadth  of  the 
commercial  world,  and  I  believe  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  who  ignores  it  ia 


152 

the  purchase  of  silver  or  in  the  execution  of  the  law  renders  himself  liable  to  im^ 
peachment  and  to  degradation  from  his  high  office.  Under  this  provision  of  the 
law  there  is  no  chance  for  playing  upon  its  execution,  cheating  the  public,  or 
cheating  the  law-makers.  Who  dare  do  it?  It  is  flashed  all  over  the  countrjr 
through  the  markets  of  the  world  that  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  is  higgling 
over  words  of  the  interpretation  of  the  provision  of  the  law,  chaffiag  with  a  man 
who  offered  his  silver  and  saying  "I  will  not  be  controlled  by  the  quotations  in 
respect  to  it,"  and  refusing  the  execution  of  the  law.  D  jes  the  Senator  believe  or 
suppose  that  in  the  administration  of  this  bill  we  are  to  be  confronted  by  any 
such  condition  as  that?  The  Senator  from  Colorado  [Mr.  Teller]  fairly  stated  a 
sufficient  reason  why  there  certainly  was  no  objection  to  this  language  being  em- 
ployed in  the  bill. 

Mr.  Cockrell  continued  the  next  day  to  discuss  the  various  features 
of  the  bill,  quoting  an  editorial  from  the  New  York  Evening  Post. 

The  discussion  of  the  conference  report  continued  to  July  10,  and 
was  participated  in  by  Mr.  Morgan,  Mr.  Allison,  Mr.  Vance,  Mr. 
Mitchell,  Mr.  Plumb,  Mr.  Faulkner,  Mr.  Teller,  and  others. 

Mr.  Morgan  called  attention  to  the  omissions  from  the  conference 
report  of  the  section  in  the  House  bill  providing  for  free  coinage 
when  silver  reached  parity  with  gold,  as  follows  : 

Connected  with  the  House  proposition — and  I  wish  to  cSll  'attention  to  this 
fact — was  section  6,  as  follows : 

"Sec  6.  That  whenever  the  market  price  of  silver,  as  determined  in  pursuance 
of  section  1  of  this  act,  is  11  for  371  25  grains  of  pure  silver,  it  shall  be  lawful  for 
the  owner  of  any  silver  bullion  to  deposit  the  same  at  any  coinage  mint  of  the 
United  States,  to  be  formed  into  standard  silver  dollars  for  his  benefit,  as  provid«^d 
in  the  act  of  January  18,  H37.  And  purchases  of  silver  bullion  shall  be  suspended 
while  it  is  being  so  deposited  for  coinage." 

The  conference  committee  came  in  here  leaving  section  6  entirely  out;  it  is  not 
in  their  bill.  There  is  no  substitute  for  it,  and  there  is  nothing  that  looks  in  that 
direction.  It  is  all  as  dark  as  Erebus,  so  far  as  it  relates  to  th«  ri ^ht  of  any  man 
whea  silver  gets  to  be  worth  more  than  a  dollar  for  3711  grains  to  go  to  the  miat 
and  have  it  coined,  or  to  ask  the  Government  to  take  any  action  upon  it  at  all. 

Before  the  vote  was  taken  Mr.  Blair  said : 

Mr.  President,  I  think  nothing  so  adds  to  the  happiness  of  the  surroundings  as 
for  a  sick  man  to  take  his  medicine  cheerfully ;  and  as  I  intend  to  vott  for  this 
bill,  after  listening  to  one  Senator  from  Oregon  who  finds  in  it  the  gold  standard, 
that  it  is  a  gold  measure,  and  the  other  Senator  frem  Oregon  who  finds  in  it  un- 
limited or  free  coinage  in  substance,  and  the  Senator  from  Kansas  who  is  satisfied 
that  it  is  a  f-ee-coinage  bill,  and  the  Senator  from  Colorado  who  is  not  satisfied 

{)reci8ely  what  it  is,  but  is  very  well  satisfied  with  it,  I  thought  that  I  would  vote 
or  the  bill,  but  that  I  would  give  notice  to  the  Senate  that  under  no  circumstances 
whatever,  liere  or  elsewhere,  would  I  ever  give  a  single  reason  for  so  doing, 
[Laughter.] 

The  conference  report  was  agreed  to  in  the  Senate,  July  10th,  by 

the  following  vote — yeas  39,  nays  26,  as  follows : 


YEAS— 89. 

Aid  rich, 

Dixon, 

Hiscock, 

Pettigrew, 

Sherman, 

Allen, 

D.)lph, 

Hoar, 

Pierce, 

Spoon  er, 

Allison, 

Edmunds, 

In  gal  Is, 

Piatt, 

Squire, 

Blair, 

Evarts, 

Joups  of  Nev. 

Plumb, 

Stewarh, 

Casey, 

Far  well, 

McMillan, 

Prtwer, 

Stockbridge- 

Cullom, 

Frye 

Manderson, 

Quay, 

Washburn. 

Davis, 

Hawley, 

Mitchell, 

Sanders, 

Wolcott. 

Dawes, 

Higgins, 

Moody, 

-  Sawyer, 

U3 


Barbour, 

Bate, 

BlackbHrii, 

Call, 

Carlisle, 

Cockrell, 

Berry, 
Blodgett, 
Brown, 
Butler, 


NAYS— 26. 

Coke. 

Hampton, 

Pugb, 

Voorbees, 

Colquitt, 

Harris, 

Ransom, 

Walthall. 

Daniel, 

JoQps  of  Ark. 

Reagan, 

Faulkner, 

Kenna, 

Tu'pie, 

Gibson, 

MoPherson, 

Vance, 

Gorman, 

Pasco, 
ABSENT— 19. 

Vest, 

Cameron, 

Gray, 

Morrill, 

Teller, 

Chandler, 

Hale, 

Paddock, 

Wilson  of  Towa, 

Eustis, 

Hearst, 

Payne, 

Wilson  of  Md. 

George, 

Morgan, 

Stanford, 

The  Conference  Keport  in  the  House. 


The  report  of  the  conference  committee  having  been  agreed  to  in 
the  Senate,  it  was  called  up  in  the  House  the  following  day,  July  11th. 

The  statement  of  the  House  conferrees  as  to  the  report  was  a& 
follows : 

The  SPEAKER.    The  Clerk  will  read  the  statement  of  the  House  conferrees. 

The  Clerk  read  as  follows : 

"The  managers  on  the  part  of  the  House  of  the  conference  on  the  disagreeing 
votes  of  the  two  Houses  on  the  amendments  of  the  Senate  to  the  bill  H.  R.  5381, 
directing  purchases  of  ailver  bullion  and  the  issue  of  Treasury  notas  thereon,  and 
for  other  purposes,  submit  the  following  statement  in  explanation  of  the  effect  of 
their  action : 

"  The  effect  of  the  alterations  made  in  the  House  bill  by  the  conferrees  is  to 
change  the  amount  of  bullion  purchased  monthly  from  four  and  a  half  million 
dollars'  worth  to  four  and  a  half  million  ounces,  or  so  much  thereof  as  may  be 
offered ; 

"  To  modify  the  legal-tender  clause  by  inserting  the  words  *  except  where  other- 
wise expressly  stipulated  in  the  contracts ; ' 

•'  To  substitute  for  the  bullion-redemption  proviso  a  requirement  that  upon  de- 
mand the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  shall  redeem  the  notes  in  gold  or  silver  coin 
in  his  discretion,  and  a  declaration  that  it  is  the  established  policy  of  the  United 
States  to  maintain  a  parity  between  the  two  metals  at  the  present  legal  ratio  or 
such  ratio  as  may  be  provided  by  law; 

"To  require  the  monthly  coinage  into  dollars  of  2,000,000  ounces  of  the  bullion 
purchased  until  July  1, 1891 ; 

"  To  omit  the  conditional  free-coinage  section." 

Mr.  CONGER.  I  move  that  the  House  agree  to  the  report  of  the  conference 
committee;  and  upon  that  1  demand  the  previous  question. 

Mr.  BLAND.  We  raise  the  question  of  consideration,  and  I  can  tell  the  gentle- 
man from  Iowa  [Mr.  Conger]  that  he  will  not  hasten  this  bill  through  in  this 
way.  This  measure  was  debated  in  the  Senate  for  three  days ;  and  on  this  side 
of  the  House  gentlemen  who  are  opposed  to  this  bill,  and  regard  it  as  the  worst 
bill  yet  proposed  on  the  subject — a  bill  which  has  had  incorporated  into  it  in  con- 
ference many  features  that  were  never  adopted  by  either  House — intend,  if  we 
•an,  to  insist  on  debating  the  measure. 

The  first  roll-call  showed  no  quorum  present,  and  a  call  of  the 
House  was  ordered  and  an  adjournment  eflected  at  8  o'clock. 

The  bill  came  up  again  on  the  12th.  Some  discussion  followed^ 
but  there  was  little  said  touching  the  merits  of  the  question.  Per- 
haps Mr.  Hermann,  of  Oregon,  expressed  in  the  following  remarks 
the  sentiment  of  a  majority  of  silver  men  on  his  side  of  the  House  : 

Mr.  HERMANN.  Mr.  Speaker,  this  legislation  is  a  compromise.  It  is  not  what 
Wall  street  wanted,  nor  is  it  what  the  people  of  the  country  wanted,  so  far  as  free. 


1^4 


and  unlimited  coinage  of  the  silver  dollar  is  meant.  It  ifl  not  the  fullest  recog- 
nition of  the  equality  of  gold  and  silver  as  money  metals.  It  means,  however,  a 
great  concession  on  both  sides.  Above  all,  its  results  mean  a  victory  to  popular 
demand.  It  is  a  great  advance  toward  free  coingge.  Now,  we  have  a  coinage  of 
$2-l:,C 00,000  per  annum.  Under  this  bill  we  shall  secure  $70,000,000  per  annum. 
The  two  metals  are  nearer  on  a  parity  to  day  than  they  were  on  yesterday.  There 
will  be  offered  and  there  will  be  purchased  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury 
4,500,000  ounces  of  siher  bullion.  This  will  give  what  the  cuuntry  has  been  eo 
long  and  so  loudly  demanding — more  money.  It  will  stimulate  production,  be- 
cause as  silver  is  raised  in  price,  so  will  also  be  the  product  of  agriculture.  New 
markets  will  be  afforded,  and  there  will  be  a  universal  stimulant  to  trade  and 
traffic  throughout  the  broad  confines  of  the  Republic. 

Should  the  fears  now  expressed  be  realized  as  to  the  failure  of  a  faithful  enforce- 
ment of  the  law,  we  shall  have  the  eucceeding  Congress  to  remedy  any  existing 
defects,  and  I  have  no  fear  that  with  the  sentiment  now  abroad  in  our  nation 
there  will  be  a  stronger  representation  in  this  House  after  the  fall  elections  on  the 
line  of  free  coinage  of  silver  than  now  exists.  This  is  not  a  political  question.  It 
is  not  a  question  for  the  caucus.  It  is  a  business  proposition.  It  is  a  question  of 
dollars  and  cents,  and  goes  to  the  material  prosperity  of  the  nation,  and  to  every 
man,  woman,  and  child  in  it. 

It  is  the  duty  of  a  Representative,  after  having  sought  to  secure  the  highest 
ultimatum  of  his  people's  wishes,  to  accept  the  nearest  approach  to  this,  in  view 
of  the  difficuldes  of  harmonizing  on  a  more  satisfactory  basis. 

And  Mr.  Allen,  of  Mississippi,  expressed,  no  doubt,  in  the  follow- 
ing quotation  from  his  remarks,  the  feeling  of  many  of  the  silver 
men  on  the  other  side  of  the  Rouse  : 

Mr.  ALLEN,  of  Mississippi.  Mr.  Speaker,  after  listening  to  those  gentlemen  on 
the  other  side  who  are  trying  to  explain  and  give  their  reasons  for  voling  for  this 
conference  report,  I  would  commend  to  them  the  caution  of  Senator  Blair,  who 
said  in  the  Senate  that  he  was  going  to  vote  for  it,  but  that  he  wanted  it  distinctly 
understood  that  he  would  never,  in  the  Senate  or  elsewhere,  undertake  to  explain 
or  give  a  reason  for  so  doing.     [Laughter.] 

Mr.  Speaker,  I  want  to  say  to  those  gentlemen  who  represent  the  silver-produc- 
ing section  of  the  country,  who  are  the  champions  of  silver  as  silver,  that  we 
tbink  they  have  acted  in  bad  faith  toward  u«,  the  friends  of  silver  as  money. 
They  pretended  to  be  for  free  coinage,  and  when  with  our  help  they  could  have 
had  free  coinaije,  and  the  gold  standard  men  became  scared  and  bousrht  them  off 
by  giving  them,  as  they  think,  a  market  fnr  their  silver  by  requiring  the  Govern- 
ment to  purchase  and  store  away  their  bullion,  they  deserted  us.  We  are  not 
championing  the  cause  of  silver  as  a  commodity  to  be  stored  in  warehouses.  We 
are  no  more  for  silver  as  a  mere  commodity  than  we  are  for  any  other  of  our  prod- 
ucts. We  b'^lieve  silver  should  be  coined  into  money  just  as  gold  is,  but  you  de- 
sert us  on  this  issue,  and  let  silver  as  a  money  go  to  the  "demnition  bowwows." 
[Laughter]  You  think  you  have  a  market  for  your  bullion  and  you  make  terms 
with  the  enemies  of  silver  money,  and  leave  the  real  friends  of  free  coinage  in 
the  lurch. 

The  vote  on  the  conference  report  was  as  follows : 


YEAS— 122. 

Adams, 

Coleman, 

Henderson,  la 

.  Mudd, 

Spoouer, 

Allen,  Mich. 

Cnmstock, 

Hermann, 

Niedringhaus, 

Stephenson, 

Anderson,  Kans. 

Conger, 

Hid, 

O'Neill,  Pa. 

Stewart,  Vt. 

Atkinson,  Pa. 

Connell, 

Hitt, 

Oeborne, 

Sriverp, 

Atkinson,  W.  Va. 

Cooper,  Ohio, 

Hopkins, 

Oiven,  Ind. 

Stockbridge, 

Baker, 

Cntcheon, 

Houk, 

Payne, 

Sweney, 

Banks, 

Dalzell, 

Kelley, 

Payaon, 

Taylor,  111. 

Bartine, 

Darlington, 

Kennedy, 

Perkins, 

Taylor,  E.  B. 

Bayne, 

Dingley, 

Ketchara, 

Peters, 

Taylor,  J.  D. 

Beckwich, 

Dolliver, 

Kinsey, 

Pickler, 

Thoman, 

Belknap, 

Doreey, 

Lacey, 

Post, 

Thompson, 

156 


Jiergan, 

Blis?, 

Bowden, 

Brewer, 

Brosius, 

Brewer, 

Buchanan,  N.  J. 

Burton, 

Cftkivrell, 

Cannon, 

Carter, 

Caswell, 

Cheadle, 

Cogswell, 


Dunnell, 

Farquhar, 

Feathers  ton, 

Fiuley, 

FJick, 

Flood, 

Frank, 

Funstou, 

Gear, 

Gest, 

Gifford, 

Grosvenor, 

Haugen, 

Henderson,  111. 


Catchings, 

Cbipman, 

Clancy, 

Cluuie, 

Cooper,  Ind, 

Cothran, 

Grain, 

Crisp, 

CuUterson,  Tex 

Davidson, 

Dibble, 

Dockery, 

Dunpby, 

Elliott, 

Ellis, 

Ealoe, 

Forman, 

Forney, 


T.a  Foliette, 

Laidlaw, 

Law8) 

Lehlbach, 

McComas, 

McCord, 

McCormick, 

McDuffie, 

ilcKenna, 

Moffilt, 

Morey, 

M'^rrill, 

Marrow, 

Morse, 

NAYS— 90. 

Goodnight, 

Hayes, 

Heard, 

Hemphill, 

Hendereon,N, 

Holman, 

Hooker, 

Kerr,  Pa. 

.Lanham, 

Lawler, 

liester,  Va. 

ijewiP, 

Maish, 

Martin,  Ind. 

Martin,  Tex. 

MoAdoo, 

McClammy, 

McClellan, 


Qaackenbush, 

Raines, 

Ray, 

Reed,  Iowa, 

Reybum, 

Rife, 

Rockwell, 

Rowell, 

Russell, 

Scull, 

Simonds, 

Smith,  111. 

^mlth,  W.Va. 

Snider, 


Townsend.Colo. 
Townsend,  Pa. 
Vandever, 
Van  Schaick, 
Walker,  Mass. 
Wallace,  N.Y. 
Williams,  Ohio. 
Wilson,  Ky. 
AVilpon,  Waah. 
Wright, 
Yardlev. 


Abbott. 
Allen,  Miss. 
Anderson,  Miss. 
Bank  head, 
Barwig, 
Bland, 
Blount, 
3oatuer, 

Breckinridge,  Ark. 
Breckinridge,  Ky. 
Brickner, 
Brookshire, 
Brunner, 
Buchanan,  Va. 
Bullock, 
Bynum, 
.Candler,  Ga. 
Carlton, 
Not  voting,  116. 

The  yeas,  on  this  vote,  were  all  Republicans  and  the  nays  all 
Democrats. 

With  this  vote  ended  all  action  on  the  silver  question  in  the  first 
session  of  the  Fifty-first  Congress.  The  act  went  to  the  President 
and  was  approved,  and  became  a  law,  July  14,  1890. 


McCreary, 
McVIiUin, 
McRae, 
Mutchler, 
C.Norton, 
Gates, 

O'Neall,  Ind. 
O'Neil,  Mass. 
Owens,  Ohio, 
Parrett, 
Paynter, 
Petl, 

Penington, 
Pierce, 
Price, 
Qxinn, 
Reilly, 
Robertson, 


Rogers, 

Rusk, 

SayerP, 

Shively, 

Stewart,  Tex. 

Stockdale, 

Stone,  Ky. 

Stone,  Mo. 

Tillman, 

Tracey, 

Venablfi, 

Wheeler,  Ala. 

Whitthorne, 

Wike, 

Willcox, 

Williams,  111. 

Wilson,  W.  Va. 

Yoder. 


CHAPTER  XI. 


The  Effect  of  the  Law. 

As  frequently  stated  in  the  debates  and  in  the  press,  the  law  is  a 
Gomproinise,  not  entirely  satisfactory  to  either  side. 

That  it  is,  however,  a  step  forward — a  step  in  the  direction  of 
free  coinage — can  not  be  denied.  The  effect  already  has  been  bene- 
ficial. The  price  of  silver  has  advanced  under  it,  and  M^ith  it  the 
price  of  agricultural  products^  especially  of  wheat  and  cotton. 

The  advance  alone  in  the  price  of  wheat  and  cotton  exported  will 
much  more  than  make  up  for  the  silver  bullion  which,  under  the  law, 
will  be  retained  in  this  country  for  monetary  use^  but  which  other- 
wise would  go  abroad  in  settlement  of  trade  balances.  There  are 
other  causes,  of  course,  operating  to  advance  the  prices  of  certain 
agricultural  products,  but  the  increase  in  prices  traceable  directly  to 
the  effect  of  the  silver  legislation  will  amount  to  hundreds  of  million* 
in  the  aggregate. 

As  to  the  relation  of  silver  to  wheat  and  cotton  the  following  from 
the  pen  of  Mr.  H.  Carey  Baird  is  to  the  point: 

Cheap  Silver  and  Indian  Competition. 

Many  editors  profoundly  versed  in  economic  questions  have  treated  the  price 
of  silver  as  a  mattei  of  entire  national  unconcern  of  no  interest  whatsoever  ex- 
cept to  the  silver  miner.  Elsewhere,  however,  I  have  repeatedly  endeavored  to 
arouse  our  people  to  a  rpalization  of  the  danger  of  silver  depreciation  through  the 
competition  of  India  with  American  wheat,  and  the  actual  relation  of  this  depre- 
dation to  this  competition.  The  wheat  export  of  India  is  now  more  than  one- 
third  of  that  of  the  United  States,  and  there  is  hardly  a  limit  to  its  possible  ex- 
pansion. 

The  silver  question,  therefore,  possesses  a  vital  significance  not  for  one  moment 
dreamed  of  in  the  philosophy  of  those  who  ever  since  the  passage  of  the  aot  of 
February  28, 1878,  denounced  the  silver  dollar.  Every  man,  woman  and  child  in 
the  country  has  an  interest  in  arresting  the  downward  progress  in  the  price  of  it, 
and  in  its  restoration,  at  least,  to  its  re  ation  with  gold  as  indicated  in  our  com- 
age — 1  to  16.  Every  step  irt  its  downward  progress  is  in  an  equal  measure  a 
bounty  on  the  export  of  Indian  products,  the  prices  of  which  are  paid  in  silver 
rupees. 

There  is  positively  nothing  but  ruin  in  the  anti-silver  scheme.  Even  the  theory 
of  financial  disaster  through  silver  coinage,  so  loudly  and  wildly,  promulgated  by 
its  advocates,  is  being  disproved  by  the  wonderful  development  of  the  trade  and 
manufactures  of  India  during  the  past  eight  years,  a  fair  idea  of  which  is  given  in 
the  growth  of  her  cotton  industry  between  1882  and  1885,  as  seen  above.  It  was 
in  vain  that  she  endeavored  to  retain  a  revenue  duty  of  5  per  cent,  on  imports  of 
cotton  goods.  The  Manchester  cotton  manufactures  obliged  the  Indian  govern ■- 
ment  to  repeal  that  duty,  although  the  revenue  was  absolutely  necessary.  Now 
she  has  15  to  20  per  cent,  by  reason  of  depreciation  of  the  rupee  in  sterling  ex- 
change, and  this  duty  or  bounty  can  alone  be  repiealed  by  the  free  and  unlimited 
coinage  of  silver  b>  the  Government  of  the  United  States  for  all  comers.  Will 
that  Government,  then,  do  its  duty  ?    Yes,  it  will. 


157 

The  Efkect  op  Oue  Silvkr  Law  Abroad. 

Mr.  Moreton  Frewen,  writing  from  England,  on  the  effect  of  our  new  silver  law 
in  that  country,  pays :  '•  I  venture  to  think  that  th«  pressure  upon  the  En^ilish 
money  market  a  liitle  later,  will  come  less  from  Paris  than  New  York.  Perhaps 
you  will  permit  me  to  make  a  forecast  of  what  is  about  to  occur.  It  U  less  a  fore- 
cast, indeed,  than  a  statement  of  the  policy  which  the  silver  men  at  Washington 
are  determined  to  pursue.  This  silver  market  will  be  very  bare  of  supplies  after 
Christmas,  so  that  before  the  next  session  of  Congress  is  half  through  the  United 
States  par  of  exchange  (1  to  15)  will  have  been  rettored,  and  the  rupee  will  be  at 
22  pence.  There  will  then  be  a  proposal,  supported  by  both  political  parties,  that 
the  United  States  shall  join  the  monetary  league  of  the  Latin  union,  with  mints 
open  at  1  to  15^.  We  shall  then  have  entered  upon  this  currency  phase.  Any 
ibl  ounces  of  silver  coined  at  Washington  will  enable  the  holder  to  draw  an  ounce 
ef  gold  from  the  Bank  of  England,  the  bank  being  powerless  to  protect  its  re- 
serves. The  operation  will  be  conducted  on  these  lines.  I  take  silver  to  the 
United  States  mint,  which  is  coined  freely,  and  returned  to  me,  if  I  prefer,  in  the 
form  of  notes.  These  notes  t  deposit  in  my  bank  in  New  York,  and  I  proceed  to 
invest  my  bank  balance  in  the  purchase  of  New  York  Central  railway  bonds. 
These  bonds  I  sell  by  cable  in  London  for  gold  ;  s^i  that  just  as  long  as  any  Euro- 
pean investor  will  buy  American  sureties  every  15J  ounces  of  silver  will  be  avail- 
able to  draw  an  ounc*>  of  gold  from  the  Bank  of  Eiigland,  the  bank  having  no  dis- 
crei  ionary  power  to  refuse  to  pay  gold." 

Mr.  Cameron  said  in  the  Senate,  since  the  passage  of  the  law,  in  re- 
plying to  Mr.  Vest — 

What  Mr.  Brown  says  is  entirely  coirect  as  to  the  depreciation  in  the  value  of 
lands,  but  in  my  opinion  it  has  not  been  the  tariff"  that  has  caused  the  decline  in 
lands.  It  was  the  demonetization  of  silver  in  1873.  Ever  since  that  demonetiza- 
tion the  price  of  land  has  decreased,  and  it  has  decreased  as  the  price  of  silver 
has  decreased.  With  the  passage  of  the  recent  silver  bill  I  know  certainly  that 
the  prices  of  cereals  has  risen  some  20  per  cent.,  and  I  think  that  before  a  year 
goes  round  the  lands  in  Pennsylvania  will  recover  their  old  value. 

Ex-Senator  Warner  Miller  said  recently  in  a  speech — 

Another  cause  for  the  low  prices  of  agricultural  products  has  been  the  trouble 
In  the  currency.  There  has  been  too  liitle  currency,  not  only  in  the  United  States, 
but  in  other  countries.  The  volume  of  money  is  the  indicator  by  which  the  value 
of  all  products  is  measured.  The  passage  of  the  silver  bill  baa  already  had  a 
marked  eff'-ct  on  agricul'ural  affairs.  This  has  had  much  to  do  with  the  rise  in 
farm  product'^  during  the  last  five  months,  although  it  must  be  borne  in  mind  that 
the  crops  this  year  are  not  up  to  the  average.  While  farmers  have  had  a  hard 
time  for  the  last  few  years  I  predict  that  in  the  next  five  years  the  condition  of 
agricultural  affairs  will  be  greatly  improved. 

A  distinction  must  be  made,  however,  between  the  effect  of  the  law 
on  silver  bullion  and  on  wheat  and  cotton  and  on  prices  generally. 

The  effect  on  silver  bullion  is  direct  by  increasing  the  demand  for 
more  silver  for  money  ;  the  effect  on  wheat  and  cotton  is  more  or  less 
direct  as  it  affects  competition  with  India.  But  the  permanent  effect 
of  the  new  law  on  prices  generally  is  only  as  it  affects  the  volume  of 
money.  If  it  operates  to  increase  the  volume  of  money,  relatively  to 
population  and  wealth,  then  it  will  tend  to  raise  prices  generally. 
But  if  the  increase  in  the  money  volume,  in  consequence  of  the  new 
law,  is  only  sufficient  to  take  the  place  of  bank  notes  retired,  and 
supply  the  needs  of  the  increase  in  population,  then  the  permanent 


158 

effect  will  be  only  to  prevent  a  further  fall  of  prices.  Hence,  those  who' 
look  for  a  general,  permanent  and  material  rise  of  prices,  as  the  nec- 
essary consequence  of  the  operations  of  the  new  law,  are  likely  to 
be  disappointed  ;  while  those  who  look  only  for  steadiness  of  prices, 
or  at  any  rate,  no  downward  tendency,  will  find,  doubtless,  in  the  end 
that  their  calculations  are  more  in  harmony  with  legitimate  deduc- 
tions from  sound  monetary  principles. 

By  the  time  Congress  meets  in  December  a  better  opportunity  will 
be  afforded  to  judge  the  law.  But  it  can  never  be  accepted  as  a  final 
settlement  of  the  silver  question.  That  can  be  finally  settled  only 
by  the  full  restoration  of  silver  to  its  constitutional  place  as  a  money 
metal  by  the  side  of  gold,  with  all  the  rights  of  mintage  and  legal 
tender  accorded  to  gold.  The  two  metals  must  stand  together  as 
money  metals,  open  to  free  use  everywhere  for  money.  It  is  not  so 
much  that  he  who  mines  gold  or  mines  silver  thereby  acquires  the 
right  to  have  it  coined  into  money,  as  it  is  the  right,  by  consti- 
tutional provisions  and  ancient  usage,  of  everybody  to  have  recourse 
to  gold  and  silver,  without  limit  or  restriction,  for  money  purposes  in 
carrying  on  business  and  in  the  payment  of  taxes  and  the  discharge 
of  all  obligations.  That  right  must  be  restored,  and  the  advocates 
of  bimetallism  will  not  cease  the  agitation  of  the  silver  question  till 
silver  is  restored  to  unlimited  coinage  and  full  legal-tender,  the  same 
in  all  respects  as  gold. 

The  End. 


//.     i^JF 


A^l^JPKNJDIX. 


The  following  is  from  a  letter  from  Ottoniar  IIanj)t,  a  distingiiislied 
authority  on  economic  qiiestionvS,  on  the  Future  of  Silver,  as  taken 
from  a  translation  in  the  Argonaut: 

THE  FUTURE  OF  SILVER. 

ESTIMATED  CONSUMPTION  OF  SILVER  FOR  THREE  OR  FOUR  YEARS  TO  COME — IT  CERTAINLY 
LOOKS  AS   THOUGH   THE   PROSPKCT  FOR  THE  WHITE  METAL  WAS  VERY  FLATTERING. 

Under  this  heading  the  London  Economist  of  August  16  publishes  a  letter  from 
Ottomar  Haupt,  dated  Parie,  August  14,  1890.  As  M.  Haupt  is  acknowledged  to 
be  one  of  the  best  authorities  in  Europe  in  monetary  statistics  and  financial 
affairs  bis  figures  of  the  past  can  be  relied  upon,  however  we  might  regard  his 
speculations  in  the  future. 

The  letter  is  some  two  columns  in  length,  but  I  shall  only  give  the  first  and  a 
portion  of  the  closing  paragraphs.  I  have  transposed  his  kilograms  into  ounces, 
ae  more  familiar  to  us  of  America : 

"At  the  present  moment  when  the  new  American  silver  bill  comes  into  force, 
and  when  consequently  a  fresh  prospect  opens  itself  to  the  whole  silver  question, 
it  is  of  great  importance  to  inquire  what  tlie  future  of  the  white  metal  will  be — of 
course  the  near  future  only,  as  in  the  course  of  time  events  may  present  them- 
selves which  may  once  more  adversely  influence  the  current  of  things  as  viewed 
from  a  standpoint  based  upon  the  experience  of  the  day. 

"This  is  the  way  in  which  I  estimate  the  yearly  absorption  of  the  white  metal 
for,  say,  three  or  four  years  to  come. 

Countries.  Ounces  Fine  Silver. 

United  States 54,000,000 

India 41600,000 

China 12,800,000 

Japan 7,680,000 

Cochin  China 640  OUO 

Straits  Settlement- 3,200,000 

England  and  Colonies 3,200,000 

Austria 3,840,000 

Servia  and  Bulgaria 1,920,000 

Balance  remaining  in  Mexico 1,600,000 

130,480,000 
Estimated  consumption  in  the  arte,  etc 17,600,000 

148,080,000 

"  In  other  words,  about  150,000,000  ouaces  of  fine  silver  will  have  to  be  bought 
in  some  way  or  other  in  the  different  markets  of  the  world,  and,  so  far,  no 
other  source  is  left  open  for  that  purpose  than  the  actual  production  of  the  mines. 

"At  any  rate,  neither  will  Germany  sell  any  more  of  her  silver  thalers,  nor  Italy 
her  demonetized  Bourbonian  piastres.  As  regards  the  other  countries,  none  will 
move  in  the  silver  question.  Their  coins  of  the  five-franca  type  represent  the 
metal  in  the  market  at  much  above  61  pence  per  ouuce  standard.  The  American 
mint  price  woiksout  at  $1.29,  equal  to  59  psnce;  today  (August  14),  we  are  about 
51  pence.    Who  will  sell  with  euch  prospect  before  him  ? 

"A  given  quantity  of  •jay  150,000,000  ounces  of  fine  silver  is  required  every  year 
in  the  near  future.  What  will  be  the  production  of  the  metal  available  in  the 
market?    Why,  according  to  the  beat  statistics  published,  all  the  mines  of  the 


160 

world  did  not  produce  more  than  98,000,000  ounces  in  1887,  110,000,000  in  1888, 
and  125,000  000  in  1889.     Where  is  the  balance  of  say  16.000  000  to  come  from  ?" 

Thus  far  M.  Haupt,  althoutfh  according  to  his  own  figures  the  deficit  must  ex- 
wed  considerably  the  16,000,000  ounces.  I  have  compared  his  estimate  with  the 
report  made  bv  Mr.  Leech,  Director  of  the  Mint,  to  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury, 
dated  April  28,  1890.  He  makes  the  prnduction  of  silver  in  the  world  pracically 
the  Pame  as  M.  Haupt,  say,  1887,  96 189,000  ounces  of  fine  silver,  1888,  110,086,453, 
and  1889,  126  000,000  ounces.  It  may  be  of  interest  to  note  his  production  of 
silver  in  the  United  States  for  those  years:  1887,  41, :i60,000  ounces;  1888,45,780,- 
000  ounces;  and  in  1889,  50,000,000  ounces. 

As  regards  the  quantity  used  in  the  arts,  the  Director  sent  a  circular  letter  to 
forty  seven  firms,  believed  to  comprise  all  the  firms  in  the  United  States  engaged 
in  tbe  business  of  making  bars  of  gold  and  silver,  and  deduces  from  the  replies 
received  that  the  value  of  the  silver  used  in  the  industrial  arts  in  the  United 
Stat^ps  during  the  year  1889  approximated  $8,760,000.  Therefore,  presumptively, 
M.  Haupt's  estimate  of  consumption  in  the  arts  of  17,600,000  ounces  of  fine  silver 
is  very  moderate.  The  Director  of  the  Mint  in  his  report  mentiocs  the  large  ship- 
ments of  silver  to  India  in  1889,  amounting  for  the  year  to  about  $40,000,000. 

Wtiile  on  ibe  subject  it  may  be  of  interest  to  give  the  amount  of  gold  aijd  silver 
in  the  great  national  depositories  of  Europe  at  latest  date  (August  21),  according 
to  the  Financial,  Chronicle  of  New  York,  August  23  : 

Banlc  ot  Gold.  Bilter. 

England.- £22,653225     

France ., 52,668  000    £50,757,000 

Germanv 27,512,667      13  756,333 

Austria  Hungary 4,475,000      16,536,000 

Netherlands 4,808,000        5,358.000 

Belgium 2,823,000        1,412,000 

Probably  about  all  of  this  gold  and  silver  in  the  different  banks  is  coined  money, 
most  of  which  has  been  in  use. 

I  have  in  this  article  gi<  en  the  figures  of  production  and  absorption  as  agreed 
upon  by  those  who  are  cor-sidered  the  most  capable  of  rendering  them.  It  is  for 
others  to  prophesy  what  shall  be  the  future,  but  it  certainly  looks  as  though  tbe 
prospect  for  ''the  white  metal "  was  very  QxxteriQg.— The  ArgonavU,  San  Franciseo, 
Cal. 

San  Fkajjcisco,  September  1, 1890. 


